A partial explanation of the vague language in the adopted ballot question was, " a generalized description of the possible SPLOST III projects for the county and all four cities will be listed.

State law defines an intergovernmental agreement, that allows for a six-year program, as project specific. Only Hampton provided a detailed project list, and the county adopted a population-based formula to grant 25 percent of revenues to the cities. I always thought this political option was inconsistent and too vague.

For the record, state law specifically lists these two (2) distinct methods for distribution of revenues among municipalities - not a convenient combining of the two. A population based formula only allows for a 5-year program.

The ballot must “place the electorate on fair notice of the projects to which the tax will be devoted,” (Attorney General decision, 1990.) The ballot is the only binding approval process. Commissioners, Elizabeth “BJ” Mathis and Warren Holder, are correct that nobody will vote for a blank check. The approach is legal, but it was also a major factor in the initial defeat of SPLOST II five years ago.

Officials said a list of the projects will be publicized later, but Mathis is concerned that some may not see the information. And she is correct. As approved, the ballot question does not include, even by reference, exactly what we are expected to approve. As such, there is at least disagreement, and at worst, a serious lack of accountability.

I expect the BOC to clearly communicate exactly what projects the revenue will be applied to, establish a timeline for completion of defined top-tier projects, and create a prioritized list of additional projects for when the primary list of projects has been completed. Citizens will then be able to vote with a clear understanding of how revenue will be used, and they can check off the projects as they are completed.

SPLOST III is a six-year, $300 million tax program. If the commissioners do not agree, or the county’s legal organ cannot report the story correctly, or the Chairman says something different at a political meeting, then we have reason to be concerned.

“The transportation plan has identified $1 billion in transportation projects. We’re anticipating that we will have $158 million,” said Mathis. “That’s the challenge,” Mathis said in the September 4th Herald article.

I do not want to see more projects get prioritized out of existence, and then "rolled over" into some future SPLOST program like we have done in the past two programs.... but that is what we get when ballot questions are vague and we allow it to happen.