by Katy Ruth Camp
krcamp@mdjonline.com
February 05, 2010 01:00 AM | 1016 views | 8

|
10 
|
|
BUFORD - Cobb Chairman Sam Olens said the county's parks bond initiative is "gone," which means Cobb will not likely be buying up any land to turn into parks - at least not anytime soon.
"I think we need to acknowledge the parks bond is gone," he said Wednesday during the county's retreat at Lake Lanier Islands Resort. "The millage can't handle it. The numbers at the time said we could do it, but that's not the case now. I think we need to be upfront with the public that it is a loss."
Sixty-five percent of voters approved the $40 million parks bond in November 2008. Olens said the $40 million was approved with the assumption that the bond would be paid for through a shift in the millage rate from the general fund into the debt service fund - and the millage rate would not be increased. The shift of 0.2 or 0.3 mills from the general fund into the fire fund that was discussed during Wednesday's meeting would only be a shift, whereas the parks bond would create a debt that would have to be paid off within the debt fund.
Even though the bond was approved by voters, Olens said the county has full authority to slash the bond from county plans altogether, and that commissioners could legally increase the millage rate to pay for the bond, but they collectively agreed the program did not warrant a raise in taxes. Olens said the bond has no time limit established within the approved referendum. However, the debt was approved to be paid off in a certain amount of years. That means each year the bonds are not taken out, less money can be taken out because the county would have a shorter amount of time to pay off the debt.
"We thought of all the options - that we could just raise taxes and do it, that we could issue half the debt, or just find ways to cut costs in other areas. But you're still not able to do any of that without a millage increase," Olens said.
Olens said he feels the bond is a "closed issue," and does not see the bonds being issued this year, in 2011 or 2012.
"I don't know how we can honestly think the economy will briskly grow, resulting in enough money to fund this," Olens said.
However, Commissioner Bob Ott said the bond will likely happen in the future.
"We're going to have to raise the millage rate to cover it, so I think people would rather put it on hold than raise taxes," Ott said. "It's not done, it's really just probably going to be put on a delay because we just don't have the funding with the way the economy is. But I don't see it happening this year."
The Parks Bond Citizens Advisory Committee, made up of 15 Cobb residents, recommended 29 parcels for the board to purchase in October using the bond.
Bob Ash, the county's public services agency director, sent a letter to the parcel owners on Nov. 17 stating that site visits by Cobb commissioners "and subsequent discussions on land purchases have been placed on hold for a 90-day period." Ash wrote that it is "necessary for the board to review the bond financing."
Wouldn't we all like to increase our household spending for "wants" rather than "needs"??? Our county leaders are doing what we are doing (or should be doing, for those of you in financial crisis) in our households. It has nothing whatsoever with "hating parks"!
Here's a solution: Why don't the parks proponents start raising private funds to buy more park land in Cobb? This happened with East Park in East Cobb, and it worked beautifully! Do I heard a rush of volunteers to start this initiative???
Most people like parks and passive greenspace. The Atlanta region did not set aside enough during its period of rapid growth. Most municipalities, counties and planners think greenspace is important for a good quality of life.
It is good for property values. When development eventually comes back, the areas near parks and greenspace will be more valuable.
Whether the recent parks process had the best of all possible outcomes is a valid question.
Whether a neutral non profit/not in Cobb group should select the parcels next time, whether the properties should be identified in advance of the vote, and whether each district should have an equal amount to spend, ought to be discussed.
And discussed again.
I am not an anti tax, free market fundamentalist, but any process using taxpayer dollars needs to be transparent and fair in distribution. Otherwise, don't do it.
The so-called "Parks" orgainizing and funding effort was nothing more than a back-door Prevent Development effort. It has nothing whatsoever to do with parkland for the sake of recreation. Any wonder that the chief organizer for this effort (name withheld) made sure more than half the parks money, for both the original and the ill-fated bond, ended up within 2 miles of his house ?
This whole thing was just window dressing for outbidding private buyers and preventing land from being developed...period. Look at the Bullard deal in detail, including the history. Look at the Lost Mountain (now dead) deal. Look at Mabry Farm. Hyde Farm.
Its the "no growth" crew, through and through.
Maybe the SPLOST's should terminate NOW ?