They Never Learn
For SPLOST III it is critical that voters get the whole picture in writing before the referendum. Information is available with a little effort. That is, if you really want to know about transportation projects. The best source is the resolution authorizing the intergovernmental agreement between the county and cities.
The board of commissioners adopted a sketchy list of transportation projects that shows no budget or timeline information. The wording that concerns me is “Road, street and bridge improvements including, without limitation, the following.” Without limitation? Does that mean some projects may be adopted later? Are revenues to be used for discretionary spending?
On the surface we know the cities will get twenty-five percent of all revenues each month. Another five percent is allocated to program management and operations – currently shown as a reduction from transportation projects.
So the county is left with seventy percent of revenues for both capital and transportation projects. The agreement shows $67.5 million (28%) for capital, and $157.5 million (66%) for transportation. These figures are set for the threshold of $240 million revenues, but allows 6% for operations and management. The county commissioners did not list any second tier projects in case revenues actually exceed $240 million. That must be why they said, “Without limitation,” leaving a lot of wiggle room.
The absence of budget figures in the publicly released transportation project list is worrisome. Budgets are listed for capital projects. I know they used spreadsheets to arrive at allocation of each district’s $24 million because I have a copy. But without revealing details to voters what can we really know?
A couple of things stand out. Local funding for Bill Gardner Parkway needed $4 million from each District 1 and District 2. But District 2 cut that share to $2 million, and added a project for an access road west of I-75. If I did not know about the proposed retail development on Jodeco Road, and the fact the access road is intended to promote that development, this would not have raised an eyebrow. Something conspicuously missing is a project to improve Jodeco Road or the intersection at Mt. Carmel beyond the proposed development. Doubtful a 2-plus mile access road could be designed, right of way purchased, and constructed for $2 million, my inquiry was met with, “No comment.” This is a project begging for budgetary wiggle room.
In the cities, Stockbridge is dedicating $27 million to public works and redevelopment efforts. McDonough’s largest projects are public safety ($8 million) and Alexander Park ($7 million). But hey, Stockbridge made their plans clear by using eminent domain and getting a lot of news coverage. And McDonough’s councilwoman Gail Notti has been pitching a butterfly house for a long time.
The ballot question still bothers me. In each SPLOST referendum voters have approved vague statements that resulted in “maybe” and “what if” project completion. The adopted ballot we will see in November is no different. I don’t like that. But I have been told, “We will address that.” So long as we accept this behavior with our votes, they will never learn.