ad

43 Comments

  1. 1

    Thomas Porter

    My reply with copy to Mayor:

    Michael Lee Jr.:

    I personally feel that your media blast, even in synopsis, is unreasonably biased to state that “which if approved will be an economic development tool to assist blighted areas of the city” without also stating that it has dangers as well as benefits. THAT should be the purpose of this City sponsored program – fairness & impartiality.

    If the presentation is equally or more biased I will become very vocal about the unfairness for weeks after Tuesday’s vote.

    Thomas Porter, AIA, LEED AP

  2. 2

    KathieCoy

    12 hours before the polls open? Will citizens be allowed to speak? Playing dirty again, Brookhaven.

  3. 3

    Brookhaven4u

    Is this a pro Redevelopment Powers Presentation?
    I smell a breach of ethics

  4. 4

    Riley

    The October Surprise. In November.

  5. 5

    Chad

    Educational forum? Call it what it is…Sales Pitch.

    So the city has provided two “experts” to educate the public. Both of them gain from a yes vote.

    Too little, too late.

    Protect Parks and Police. Vote No to Redevelopment Powers.

    And for all you Lakeside/Briarcliff advocates, read your city charters. Be prepared to stomach this battle in the SECOND YEAR of your cityhood. Good grief.

  6. 6

    Andrew Wells

    Who’s Kenneth Bleakl–Oh, wait, it’s Halloween. Just another loose goblin.

  7. 7

    Drew

    Retrieved Nov 2, 2014 7:20pm from:

    http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/About%20Us/the%20region/rs_bios_TAC_final.pdf

    Kenneth D. Bleakly, Jr.
    President
    Bleakly Advisory Group

    Ken Bleakly has enjoyed a long career in the real estate industry. He is president of Bleakly Advisory Group, an Atlanta-based consulting firm created in 2001, that specializes in market and financial analysis, public finance and the implementation of pubic-private partnerships.

    He has extensive experience with tax allocation districts in Georgia and tax increment financing nationally. He has advised the cities of Alpharetta, Atlanta, Woodstock, Gainesville, Suwannee, Flowery Branch, Lilburn, Norcross, Gwinnett Place CID, Gainesville, Albany, Oakwood, Holly Springs, Avondale Estates and Columbus, and MARTA on the creation of TAD districts. He has worked for developers in securing over $75 million in TAD funding for their projects from
    Atlanta’s Westside, Eastside, Princeton Lakes and Beltline TADs.

    Prior to forming Bleakly Advisory Group, Ken served for five years as president of COPA, Inc.—a non-profit developer created by the Atlanta business community to stimulate development around Centennial Olympic Park. From 1990-1996 Ken was the partner in charge of Arthur Andersen’s real estate consulting practice in Atlanta.

    He is an author and frequent speaker on urban and community development issues both regionally and nationally. Ken holds a Masters in City and Regional Planning from Rutgers University and an undergraduate degree from Rollins College

    ——————————————————————————-

    Commentary:

    According to his bio, Brookhaven’s impromptu community forum features a man who makes his living from TADs.

    If Brookhaven is bringing him to campaign for people to vote YES on the redevelopment referendum he seems like the right person.

    If Brookhaven is bringing him to present an objectively neutral information session he is a very questionable choice.

    ► “He has advised the cities of […] and MARTA on the creation of TAD districts” ◄

    ► “He has worked for developers in securing over $75 million in TAD funding” ◄

    This nonsense is indicative of the current leadership’s attitude towards its residents. Not only have they pulled a last minute impromptu (and inappropriate) forum out of -nowhere- but they insult us by assuming that we’re idiots. It feels as if they are indifferent to our concerns.

    I wish that Tuesday’s vote included a recall referendum.

  8. 8

    Shame

    I honestly can’t believe they could be so bold. The must believe we are all ignorant. I voted Yes for Brookhaven and I’m ashamed I did. As far as DeKalb goes, sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t. The people I voted into office are betraying our trust and abusing their power for gain. How do they sleep at night knowing they lied to all of us and continue to disrespect the people they were elected to represent? It’s disgusting.

  9. 9

    MK

    Hopefully this desperation move is a sign that the vote is expected to be NO.

  10. 10

    Harrison Williams

    http://www.blagroup.com/whoweare.html

    The expert’s info is attached. He makes his living implementing municipal financing and assisting in the creation of revenue bonds and tax allocation districts.

  11. 11

    Eddie E.

    Come on folks, the city has decided what they want to do and they expect everyone to cooperate.
    After all, it’s just OUR MONEY!

  12. 12

    Eddie E.

    Sad thing is, the level of secrecy from the beginning should have made the referendum a massive NO.
    Make sure the Voters are only Fooled ONCE on Tuesday.

  13. 13

    patrick

    I agree with you, Let us hope voters will vote to save money by voting for Tim so we do not have to pay school tax and city tax to protect students at Ashford park that jack wants us to.

  14. 14

    Shame

    Patrick, I might agree with you if I could understand you. Tax to protect students at a school?

  15. 15

    Eddie E.

    Could you try that again with a little focus on subject-verb agreement?

  16. 16

    Riley

    A few questions to keep in mind for tonight’s meeting.

    1). Who will determine if a property is “blighted”.?

    2). What are the criteria for a property to be considered “blighted”? Example: Your blighted property is my free standing 30-acres of trees next to Clairmont Road across from PDK.

    3). What is the appeals process if a property owner does not want to sell?

    4). Can the City of Brookhaven resort to using eminent domain to take the property? (Answer: Yes. Please see Item B (5): http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-36/provisions/chapter-44/36-44-6/ )

    5). Will the person who makes the redevelopment decisions be able to gain personal financial benefit from any transactions related to that redevelopment?

    6). Who is ultimately responsible for repaying the bonds if a particular redevelopment is unsuccessful?

    And, if you’re curious, take a look at Kelo v. City of New London: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

  17. 17

    Chad

    Interesting. Mr. Bleakly’s bio states he got interested in city building through his reading of the 1960’s novel, The Power Broker.

    Amazon: One of the most acclaimed books of our time, winner of both the Pulitzer and the Francis Parkman prizes, The Power Broker tells the hidden story behind the shaping (and mis-shaping) of twentieth-century New York (city and state) and makes public what few have known: that Robert Moses was, for almost half a century, the single most powerful man of our time in New York, the shaper not only of the city’s politics but of its physical structure and the problems of urban decline that plague us today.

    In revealing how Moses did it–how he developed his public authorities into a political machine that was virtually a fourth branch of government, one that could bring to their knees Governors and Mayors (from La Guardia to Lindsay) by mobilizing banks, contractors, labor unions, insurance firms, even the press and the Church, into an irresistible economic force–Robert Caro reveals how power works in all the cities of the United States. Moses built an empire and lived like an emperor. He personally conceived and completed public works costing 27 billion dollars–the greatest builder America (and probably the world) has ever known. Without ever having been elected to office, he dominated the men who were–even his most bitter enemy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, could not control him–until he finally encountered, in Nelson Rockefeller, the only man whose power (and ruthlessness in wielding it) equalled his own.

    Sounds about right. Redevelopment Powers would give unelected beauracrat’s the ability to obligate millions of dollars of bonds to the taxpayer without your vote or input.

    Protect Parks and Police. Vote No to Redevelopment Powers.

  18. 18

    Charlie Brown

    Just so I understand you all…anyone who doesn’t share your viewpoint on Redevelopment Powers doesn’t deserve to be heard, is a goblin, is putting together a ‘sales pitch’, believes you are ‘ignorant’, is ‘betraying your trust’, and shouldn’t be able to sleep at night.

    Stay Classy.

    News flash…some people disagree with your opinion and that’s OK! It doesn’t mean they think you are stupid and it doesn’t mean they are insulting you…it does mean that they disagree with your conclusions.

    You see…all of those places you listed “the cities of Alpharetta, Atlanta, Woodstock, Gainesville, Suwannee, Flowery Branch, Lilburn, Norcross, Gwinnett Place CID, Gainesville, Albany, Oakwood, Holly Springs, Avondale Estates and Columbus, and MARTA on the creation of TAD districts”….they all seem to be running without taking people’s houses right and left or defaulting on debt or raising taxes to pay for TAD projects…and that’s kind of the point of ‘education’…to show that despite loud claims to the contrary, there hasn’t been a TAD back project that has defaulted, there are communities that have greatly benefited from TAD projects, there are many communities that haven’t plunged into anarchy and backroom deals because they have development powers, there was a bill called the homeowner bill of rights passed to again, that shouldn’t be ‘insulting’ because those are facts.

    Now if you are offended by facts, which is all too typical in these parts when it comes to ‘No’ campaigns…well, we’ve seen it before and we’ll see it again…your voice will get marginalized as rational people begin to tune you out.

  19. 19

    Chad

    Charlie, Charlie, Charlie,

    Everyone on this blog obviously appreciates engaging conversations. Please, by all means go past the tired one liner of, “name one TAD that has defaulted.” As many have shown several times, that’s not the point. Although there are several very public defaults, (Beltline-Technical, Sunshine Academy – Cerfifiable), city’s don’t allow defaults because it would ruin the credit rating. Therefore the General Fund as allowed by RPL is raided to support unsucessful projects. Furthermore, why should government officials of a small city with a $18M budget be trusted to invest millions in the real estate market? I don’t think any of them has real estate experience beyond home ownerhship. If big projects on Buford Highway or Oak Forest…in District 1…we’re deemed profitable by the markets, they’d already be there.

    So won’t you be the first to tell us why, when and how many bonds should be issued to redevelop Brookhaven? Give us facts. Show us financial statements. If you don’t have financial statements, make some stuff up.

  20. 20

    Horatio@TheGate

    “Just so I understand you all…anyone who doesn’t share your viewpoint on Redevelopment Powers doesn’t deserve to be heard, is a goblin…”

    Charly, Brookhaven City Government is not “anyone”!

    (Frankly it is more like an occupation force than ” govrnment).

    BTW, why are places of “government” (Brookhaven and Chamblee City Halls) places for voting ALSO?

    Will they be counting the vote there too?

    More like Mexico everyday.

  21. 21

    Drew

    Hi Charlie Brown:

    I don’t know if you don’t genuinely understand this – or if you are a shill for the city – or something else …

    I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you genuinely don’t understand what’s going on and will spend some time trying to clarify the issues.

    “Just so I understand you all…anyone who doesn’t share your viewpoint on Redevelopment Powers doesn’t deserve to be heard, is a goblin, is putting together a ‘sales pitch’, believes you are ‘ignorant’, is ‘betraying your trust’, and shouldn’t be able to sleep at night.”

    ► Who is saying these things? We haven’t said that this industry spokesperson doesn’t “deserve to be heard.” Obviously though there is a difference between being “heard” and being the only voice presented by our city on this issue. If the city is interested in presenting the facts then they would have:

    (1) planned this “educational forum” in advance and with advance notice to the community rather than put together an ad-hoc meeting the Sunday before elections;

    (2) not scheduled a “educational forum” the night before voting;

    (3) involved the community in planning this “educational forum;”

    (4) involved a neutral moderator or multiple moderators with disparate views; and

    (5) never involved a person whose source of income comes from a YES vote.

    ▬ “News flash…some people disagree with your opinion and that’s OK! It doesn’t mean they think you are stupid and it doesn’t mean they are insulting you…it does mean that they disagree with your conclusions.”

    ► I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. It’s refreshing to hear and read cogent discussions and gain insight from a variety of perspectives.

    Unfortunately, the “YES” campaigners are in a terrible position because there is no legitimate argument for redevelopment powers for Brookhaven. This is why these people are relying on half-truths, mistruths, and obfuscation: the facts are not in their favor.

    ▬ “You see…all of those places you listed […] they all seem to be running without taking people’s houses right and left or defaulting on debt or raising taxes to pay for TAD projects”

    ► I did not list those places, I copy-and-pasted them from the bio of this person who makes his living by “[working] for developers in securing over $75 million in TAD funding.” The point of that list of cities lifted from his bio is to illustrate how intimately entangled this person is with developers and others who serve to benefit from a YES vote. Again, this person has a conflict of interest and it’s wholly inappropriate for the city to leverage its position to attempt to tilt this vote in their favor.

    ▬ “…and that’s kind of the point of ‘education’…to show that despite loud claims to the contrary,”

    ► Actually the point of education is *not* to show that TADs aren’t always terrible things, the point of education is to educate.

    This is not just a play on words or mere syllogism, it is an important point: this “educational forum” should be about educating the populace, not last-minute campaigning by the city.

    As pointed out above, there are several steps the city should have taken if they were interested in educating us. That’s not what they’ve done and one can presume it’s because the city is not interested in educating its citizenry; they are merely interested in the passage of this referendum.

    ▬ “there hasn’t been a TAD back project that has defaulted, there are communities that have greatly benefited from TAD projects, there are many communities that haven’t plunged into anarchy and backroom deals because they have development powers, there was a bill called the homeowner bill of rights passed to again, that shouldn’t be ‘insulting’ because those are facts.”

    ► Wrong. TAD / TIF projects have gone terribly wrong and communities have suffered greatly. Stockton, California and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania are great examples of the impact from improper TAD / TIF projects.

    This does not mean that every single TAD is a disaster, some of them have been very successful and were very necessary for those communities. At the same time, some of them have been unmitigated disasters. Our point is that although TADs are sometimes useful tools, Brookhaven is not in need of them. Our other point is that even if Brookhaven did need them, we would never give our current representatives that power for a number of reasons.

    ▬ “Now if you are offended by facts, which is all too typical in these parts when it comes to ‘No’ campaigns…well, we’ve seen it before and we’ll see it again…your voice will get marginalized as rational people begin to tune you out.”

    ► I will gladly put my facts against your facts because they are clearly in our favor. What I won’t do though is stand idly by while you and yours misrepresent and obfuscate those facts.

    If the proponents have facts to support their claims why are they hiding in the shadows and engaging in childish games instead of substantive dialogue?

    Are they offended by the facts or are they just afraid of them Charlie?

  22. 22

    Eric Robert

    These mailers encouraging me to vote YES that have the Buford Highway sign on it and throw around the “BLIGHTED” word bother me.

    They are reinforcing false stereotypes and or perceptions that many who probably have never or rarely have been to the restaurants or stores or to anyone’s apartment on Buford Highway believe.

    Its just like last Thursday’s article in The Dunwoody Crier that was an out and out promotion piece for this act. Dick Williams ignored the fact that the whole Town Brookhaven/Sembler government financing was a farce, that after the community caught wind of the first deal and got it turned back a second deal was done behind closed doors and the public had no input into it. Keep in mind these deals were done after Sembler had already gotten zoning approval and was well on their way to developing the property.

    What bothered was the Crier’s characterization of “dilapidated” (that word again) for the solid workforce housing that was on the Town Brookhaven site before. I had knocked on doors several times in that complex, it was not dilapidated but rather one of the few decent affordable places to live along Peachtree Road.

    So if that’s the definition of dilapidated I am very worried that we will be in essence providing government assistance to gentrify people out of the Buford Highway corridor. I have no problem with it happening on its own but I object to tax breaks for that to happen.

    Sure there are a couple problem apartment complexes, but they can be dealt with through code enforcement.

    And yes I don’t think Brookhaven should be doing these “educational” forums unless they adequately have people from all sides of this issue.

    Dunwoody tried to do something analogous to this with their large bond proposal that amongst other things would have purchased the few low income apartment complexes in Dunwoody, the ones on Peachtree Industrial, torn them down, and built a park.

    Thankfully a coalition conservatives concerned about Dunwoody Mission Creep and people concerned about lower income residents turned out to vote that bond issuance down. And through code enforcement Dunwoody has been able to largely clean up any problems at these apartments, though they still do house those who may make less than Dunwoody’s average income.

    My fear is that TADs will be used to do the same thing. But that threat is not visible now because the projects have not been identified. And once they are we will no longer be able to vote on it.

  23. 23

    Charlie Brown

    “That’s not the point”…..funny, it sure was the point of the flyer your group sent out claiming that TADs are risky and that taxpayers would be on the hook…both of which claims have no basis in any factual record. Show us one example of TIF backed bonds going into default where taxpayers had to pay out. That’s your claim…and you can’t back it up…and instead when you get called out on it, you set up hundreds of straw men intended to scare people.

    Let’s talk about the Sunshine Academy, Chad.

    1) Was that a TAD? No. But why should that stop you from implying that they are the same thing, right?

    2) Who was on the hook for the default? Wells Fargo. Not Alpharetta or it’s citizens…. (http://northfulton.com/stories/Wells-Fargo-sues-Fulton-Science-Academy-after-19M-default,22508)

    3) Was the credit rating of Alpharetta affected by the default? No

    4) Was the credit rating of the Alpharetta Development Authority hurt by that? No. The rating on the 2013 bond issuance for the Alpharetta Campus of GA Technical College was AAA by Moody’s and S&P. https://www.pfm.com/uploadedfiles/bondcalendar/DevelopmentAuthorityAlpharetta_RevenueBondsSeries2013_NOS%20_POS.pdf

    5) How much did the city of Alpharetta spend from the general fund to prevent it from ‘ruining the credit rating’? None. The authority allowed the bonds to be downgraded and eventually Wells Fargo sued the Fulton Science Academy for the funds after default.

    Confuse the issue and scare people by not telling the whole story…just a shame that this is the campaign you and your group embarked upon.

  24. 24

    Chad

    🙂

    Not my story to tell. I didn’t ask for the power. You did.

    Plus, I’m not on the board of the BRRC. I’m just a local citizen who saw Guv Deal sign a law allowing for the vote…a law I never heard of…from anyone…and didn’t get an explanation when I asked…last Spring.

    Now explain the Beltline fiasco since you seem to be on a roll…

    Tell us who is making the bond payments for APS since the City of Atlanta won’t pay.

    Tell us why the state of California disbanded all “authorities” created by RPL.

    Tell us why elected officials should be allowed to play RE Developer with our money on the line.

    Tell us why we should wait 30 years before a bond is paid off to support the additional police and infrastructre required from redevelopments that don’t pay taxes.

    Tell us why COB officials think they can create successful projects ANYWHERE the projects don’t already exist.

    Protect Parks and Police – Vote No to Redevelopment Powers.

  25. 25

    Charlie Brown

    Stockton, CA?

    You mean the same Stockton that had over $900 Million in unfunded pension funds, by far the largest of their outstanding obligations when they declared bankruptcy?
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/04/03/muni-bankruptcies-set-up-war-between-pensioners-and-bondholders/

    Come on….you guys are playing shell games. Look, Stockton defaulted! (It didn’t have anything to do with redevelopment bonds, but don’t pay any attention to that…redevelopment scary!)

  26. 26

    Chad

    The entire state of California.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/29/local/la-me-redevelopment-20111230

    RPL is the biggest big government tool there is other than the ability to raise your taxes.

    Did you want to try a couple of answers to my other questions?

    No kidding. You are the first real YES informational piece anyone has seen.

    Go for it. You have about 17 hours to turn the tide.

  27. 27

    Chad

    Almost forgot, Charlie. Be sure to attach financial statements to any claims of successful projects.

  28. 28

    Charlie Brown

    ER-

    Fair comment and thankfully not full of agenda or false info…I assume you would agree that the Ford plant in Hapeville and the GM plant in Doraville qualify as blighted or dilapidated after they were closed. Same for the Atlantic Steel mill. All three have been/are in process of being successfully redeveloped thanks in part to financing allowed by redevelopment powers. Atlantic Station, Porsche North American HQ and the soon to be developed multi-use GM project are positives for their respective communities.

    It’s great to think that we should be able to just wait for the private sector to redevelop the commercial and light industrial areas on Buford Highway on their own…but why would they take that risk when they are being incentivized by other local governments with TIF financing? Not having redevelopment powers puts Brookhaven at a competitive disadvantage…great examples? How about all of the light industrial on PIB that Chamblee can’t get anyone to build on despite the amazing location? Or Chamblee Plaza which just can’t seem to get any traction compared to other local spots?

    One quick point on your ‘housing’ comment…if a project was done with TAD or other types of financing, the city would have a say in the type of housing to be offered in those developments, including any sort of percentage of affordable housing. If private developer decides to buy the Cliff Valley apartments, what would be the incentive for that developer to not maximize profits by offering high priced, high end units only?

  29. 29

    Charlie Brown

    Did you even read the article on the LA Times you cited? The state had a $25Billion budget deficit and the state government along with county governments needed to eliminate those agencies so they could get to the tax revenues. It had nothing to do with redevelopment powers causing widespread defaults…it had everything to do with a desperate state government needing to tap into money that was off limits to it.

    The whole argument you’ve built is based upon a farce.

    BTW…from YOUR citation: “Authorized by law since 1945, the agencies have been responsible for such success stories as Old Pasadena and San Diego’s Gaslamp Quarter”

    but you know…no success stories. LOL.

  30. 30

    Drew

    Of course it had something to do with redevelopment (and the pensions and the economy and hubris etc).

    ►$100MM+ debt (2004 – 2006) by Stockton’s redevelopment agency◄

    “But Stockton’s leaders burned through their reserves and began planning new construction projects to make the city more appealing to new residents.

    “A $47 million bond issue in 2004 was meant to finance construction of a sports and concert arena to revitalize the city’s downtown. The arena was built, but it ended up losing money.

    “A downtown high-rise building was acquired for a new City Hall. A revamp of Stockton’s downtown riverfront was financed, along with other projects, by more than $100 million in debt between 2004 and 2006 by the city’s redevelopment agency.”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-stockton-bankruptcy-cause-idUSBRE8621DL20120703

  31. 31

    Drew

    I (and others) have repeatedly (and explicitly) stated that TADs / TIFs have some success stories.

    We know that life is not strictly about binary decisions; some things can be bad in some situations but can be good in other situations.

    The point (which has been stated repeatedly) is that:

    —–> Brookhaven does not need TADs

    and even if TADs were needed for Brookhaven:

    —–> We would never want our current leadership to have that power.

    Tell us why Brookhaven is in need of TADs.

    Tell us why Brookhaven should trust its current leadership with that power.

    Tell us how you would be impacted from passage of this referendum.

  32. 32

    Chad

    Show us some financial statements. Old Pasadena and Gaslamp success are arguments by the bureaucrats that created the debt.

  33. 33

    Charlie Brown

    Drew-

    From the reuters article you cite…

    “Stockton ended up absorbing that debt after California’s governor eliminated local redevelopment agencies last year.”

    So, just to be clear, none of the debt from the redevelopment agencies would have been absorbed by Stockton but for the change in the law by the State of California eliminating the agencies. I didn’t read ‘citizens will be on the hook regardless of the repayment status of the bonds if the state of Georgia unilaterally succeeds at changing the law after bonds have been issued and such action survives a challenge in the GA Supreme court’ on your fliers….it was much more ominous on who was on the hook…but again, details.

  34. 34

    Eric Robert

    CB, I agree with your examples. Atlantic Station re-mediated an abandoned toxic area left by the Steel Mill. Same potentially for the GM plant at Doraville.

    My concern is in comments by some in the city government and or by the Mailer’s talking about blighted areas of Buford Highway but not identifying the locations. And as we saw with Town Brookhaven, some people’s ideas of blighted are those units that used to be where Town Brookhaven was. Using government subsidies to fund that is inexcusable.

    I agree those abandoned industrial sites in Chamblee on Peachtree could be worthy of some subsidies – then again, unless there is some sort of clean up issue I don’t know that it is needed since its just a matter of time.

    And yes valid point about the benefit to affordable housing by having the government in the mix. The only problem with that is Town Brookhaven was supposed to have that and I’ve yet to see a government condition that can address that issue.

    I’ve raised the concern at the steering group committee hearings and everyone says they recognize the need to protect the residents that are there/protect the supply of workforce housing. Yet I don’t see any concrete specifics regarding that in the Buford Corridor plan, as I said all I see is the pro Tad folks plastering Buford Highway and blighted all over their mailers.

    So yes TADs can be good. But displacing residents aided in part by TADs concerns me. I really wish we had waited a couple more years to do this. We could always approve it later, but we really can’t ever take away the approval.

  35. 35

    Drew

    “I didn’t read ‘citizens will be on the hook regardless of the repayment status of the bonds if the state of Georgia unilaterally succeeds at changing the law after bonds have been issued and such action survives a challenge in the GA Supreme court’

    The issue of repayment is largely one of semantics.

    If Brookhaven issues redevelopment bonds and – for whatever reason – is unable to pay those bonds back, it is generally believed that Brookhaven will find a way to pay those bonds back by alternative means.

    If bond purchasers do not believe this then it will affect the value of that bond.

    Further, if Brookhaven were to renege on bond repayments, it would be considerably more difficult to issue bonds in the future.

    “on your fliers….it was much more ominous on who was on the hook…but again, details.”

    I’m not involved with any fliers, just with this: http://noTAD.org

  36. 36

    Charlie Brown

    Those are the words of the author of the article you cited…so the article is good and reliable for making your point, but not enough for anything counter to your stated dogma?

    Sad, but not surprising.

    If only there were public audits done of these TAD projects where we could see ‘some financial statements’…

    “There’s no doubt that Atlantic Station has been a successful financial investment for both its initial investors and the city. That success is cited in a new city audit”

    http://saportareport.com/blog/2012/06/city-audit-atlantic-station-a-success-shows-need-to-rein-in-renewal-program/

    The Atlanta TAD program, which includes the Beltline, Westside, and other locations, had a SURPLUS of $226M city wide in 2011.

    Here’s the best part…

    “From 2001 through 2011, increment in the five districts exceeded debt service payments by more than $46 million, even after early redemption of more than $85 million in bonds. Debt service coverage ratios in 2011 ranged between 1.89 and 6.76. Financial analysts consider 1.2 to be a reasonable minimum debt service coverage ratio.”

    Chad-what does ‘early redemption’ mean? What about ‘exceeded debt service’?

    Full financial audit at the link below.

    http://saportareport.com/wp-content/uploads/Atlanta-Performance-Audit-Tax-Allocation-Districts.pdf

  37. 37

    Eddie E.

    Mike Jacobs wrote a bill, the City signed off on it and now they EXPECT everyone to submissively accept it.

    WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN OUR INSTRUCTIONS!! WHO DARES TO DISAGREE!!

  38. 38

    Jealous in Chamblee, Mary Kirkendoll

    Charlie Brown hit the nail on the head w/ the statement, without the TAD option through redevelopment powers, Brookhaven will indeed be at an economic disadvantage.
    Look at all the cities & towns using these tools, it’s just the way big development works in this day & age.
    The thing that seems the most distorted and has been repeated ad nauseum is ,..”the elected officials want to TAKE money from you & give to select friends/cronies.”
    Do none of you understand, the use of TAD’s is for the future benefit of the community and the people that live there??
    These developers don’t have to come build new amenities here at all. They can just as easy go to where they are welcome and where the community is supportive of their elected officials vision. Seems Chad & Drew just don’t want to see good quality developments bringing new revenue and better jobs to Brookhaven.
    Gwinnett County IS the place to locate!! It’s quite the boomtown. 5 Tad’s in Gwinnett County, which include the huge project at Jimmy Carter…the Jacoby Development building a 105 acre movie studio/school/residential/hotels/highrises/student housing, etc. Complete transformation of that declining corridor. Now Union city using TAD financing to build sound studios where Shannon Mall is. Fort Gillem, East Point, where Tyler perrys new sound lots will be built,..also a TAD!!
    Big money is locating to Atlanta metro,..and the Buford Highway corridor is being left behind.
    Part of the redevelopment is helping people relocate. HELPING–giving–.The people living in apartments that might be sold to development will have a new place to live. Trying to insinuate people will be left homeless is all part of the ‘scare’ tactics. It’s just not true.
    And neither is that there will never be citizen input!! There will be opportunity for much citizens input. It’s part of the law and the process!!
    The Smyrna 50 acre Belmont Hills is in full swing w/ it’s TAD for Jack Halpern to get infrastructure in place.
    City of Duluth has a TAD for their downtown area.
    Clayton County had 5 TAD’s, Atlanta, 6. Augusta, Ga. 1 TAD for a long corridor.
    Chad keeps repeating the Beltline is a failure. The Beltline is so massive and expensive, but I have faith the financial issues w/ the Beltline will be rectified. Have you spent time along the Beltline? It is totally revamping many poor, rundown neighborhoods around Atlanta, giving more opportunities to bring people out of poverty. But in the long run, the citizens of Atlanta are the benefactor of the best infrastructure project since the railroad. The schools will benefit and tax revenues will go up all along Beltline neighborhoods for a sustainable, solid , secure future.
    It is not the duty of any US city to ensure housing for the illegal immigrant population.
    This area has become what it is due to NEGLECT from county & surrounding city officials.
    .Brookhaven wants to be part of the solution to revitalize these neglected areas.

  39. 39

    Saul

    Clearly you have more confidence in our mayor and city council than we do. But you don’t have to worry about their mistakes because they are playing with money that isn’t yours.

  40. 40

    Brookhaven Bob

    That’s right, Saul. Jealous is NOT a Brookhaven resident.

  41. 41

    Eddie E.

    Does it make you feel better to consistently repeat the same half page of inaccurate nonsense over, and over, and over for an issue that does not even put your assets at risk?

  42. 42

    MK

    Another rant blaming the evils of this world on illegal immigration coming at 3…2…1

  43. 43

    Jealous in Chamblee, Mary Kirkendoll

    You guys are so uneducated on TAD’s and economic development, and other issues as well. If BuHi stays undeveloped,…there’ll only be yourselves to blame.
    I never thought the suburbs would be so much more progressive than ITP B’haven, but there are so many places that are just more sophisticated. Who ever knew Woodstock, Roswell & Smyrna would be nicer places to live than intown. You people really are backwards.

Comments are closed.