The true skinny on the TAD issue.

Well, I've just finished about two hours of re-reading the entirety of the O.C.G.A. sections pertaining to TADS (go to Title 36, Chapter 44, Development Powers). First of all, the language makes it consistently, glaringly clear that the intent of the enabling legislation was REdevelopment. The following language is but a fraction of the supporting language throughout the entire chapter. � 36-44-8. Creation and implementation of tax allocation districts In order to create and carry out the purposes of a tax allocation district, the following steps are required: (1) Preparation by the redevelopment agency of a redevelopment plan for the proposed tax allocation district and its submission for consent to the political subdivision or board of education required to consent, if the plan proposes to include in the tax allocation increment ad valorem property taxes levied by a political subdivision or board of education required to consent to such inclusion under Code Section 36-44-9, or if the plan proposes to pledge for payment or security for payment of tax allocation bonds and other redevelopment costs the general funds of a county required to consent to such inclusion under Code Section 36-44-9; (2) Submission of the redevelopment plan to the local legislative body of the political subdivision whose area of operation will include the tax allocation district; (3) Adoption by the local legislative body of a resolution approving the redevelopment plan and which: (A) Describes the boundaries of the tax allocation district with sufficient definiteness to identify with ordinary and reasonable certainty the territory included. The boundaries shall include only those whole units of property assessed for ad valorem property tax purposes; (B) Creates the district on December 31 following the adoption of the resolution or on December 31 of a subsequent year as determined by the local legislative body; (C) Assigns a name to the district for identification purposes. The first district created shall be known as "Tax Allocation District Number 1," followed by the name of the political subdivision within whose area of operation the district is located; (D) Specifies the estimated tax allocation increment base; (E) Specifies ad valorem property taxes to be used for computing tax allocation increments; (F) Specifies the property proposed to be pledged for payment or security for payment of tax allocation bonds which property may include positive tax allocation increments derived from the tax allocation district, all or part of general funds derived from the tax allocation district, and any other property from which bonds may be paid under Code Section 36-44-14, as determined by the political subdivision subject to the limitations of Code Sections 36-44-9 and 36-44-20; and (G) Contains findings that: (i) The redevelopment area on the whole has not been subject to growth and development through private enterprise and would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed without the approval of the redevelopment plan or includes one or more natural, historical, or cultural assets which have not been adequately preserved or protected and such asset or assets would not reasonably be anticipated to be adequately preserved, protected, or improved without the approval of the redevelopment plan; and (ii) The improvement of the area is likely to enhance the value of a substantial portion of the other real property in the district. If any information required to be included in the resolution approving the redevelopment plan under subparagraphs (A) through (G) of this paragraph is contained in the redevelopment plan, then the resolution approving the redevelopment plan may incorporate by reference that portion of the redevelopment plan containing said information; and (4) A certified copy of any resolution giving the consent required under paragraph (1) of this Code section must be submitted to the local legislative body of the political subdivision whose area of operation will include the tax allocation district prior to inclusion of such ad valorem property taxes or general funds in calculation of the tax allocation increment.HISTORY: Code 1981, � 36-44-8, enacted by Ga. L. 2009, p. 158, � 2/HB 63.Title NoteChapter Note Clearly, you cannot REdevelop that which has never been developed. Ergo, in my opinion, Mr. Drury's project does not even come close to clearing the most basic threshold for qualifying - whereas the mill project clearly did under the brownfield provision. I wish Mr. Drury every success (finally) and I think the idea of looking for users for our now excessive and costly water and sewer capacity is commendable. However, this is not the way to go. I'm against it. In another section, with regards to the city creating the necessary "redevelopment authority" required for a TAD, the opposition's shibboleth that the created authority would have unto itself the power of eminent domain is not true (see (5)). (b) Any delegation of redevelopment powers pursuant to the authority of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be limited by the following requirements: (1) Any redevelopment plan must be approved by resolution of the local legislative body of the political subdivision as a condition precedent to the implementation of said redevelopment plan, and such approval shall be subject to the requirements of Code Section 36-44-7; (2) The boundaries of any redevelopment area must be described by resolution of the local legislative body of the political subdivision; (3) A tax allocation district must be created by resolution of the local legislative body of the political subdivision; (4) The issuance of any tax allocation bonds shall be by resolution of the local legislative body of the political subdivision; (5) The power of eminent domain may only be exercised under this chapter by the local legislative body of a political subdivision; and (6) A local legislative body may not delegate to a redevelopment agency created under subsection (b), (c), (d), or (e) of Code Section 36-44-4 any urban redevelopment project powers except those which may be conferred on an urban redevelopment agency under Code Section 36-61-17 of the "Urban Redevelopment Law." Let me make another thing clear. The local knee jerk opponents of anything new and innovative would have you believe that the law requires the pledging of the full general revenues of the city to pay off any bonds issued in a TAD deal. That is absolutley false, de jure. By law, only the tax revenues from the tax allocation district must be allocated to that debt service. Now, de facto, if the city exercised its legal option to default on those obligations rather than dip into the general funds, they would take a hit on their bond rating. So, while it is de facto likely that they would dip into the general fund if they faced that situation, de jure, they are not legally obliged to.