::SB 5 - Georgia Public-Private Infrastructure Act; comprehensive regulations (PF)::

When viewing in FireFox the text is jumbled and illegible at several points on the page linked above. IE viewing is fine. The PDF file for Senate Bill 5 can be found ::h e r e::

(WSB Radio) — Georgia Senate Minority Whip David Adelman says a proposed Senate bill that would restructure the workings of public-private partnerships in the state would sell out Georgia citizens.

Adelman tells WSB's Jeff Dantre', “Senate Bill 5 allows, in secret, any government entity whether it be the state or any of the 159 counties or any of the more than 700 cities or 180 school boards to make a deal with some big insider developer that pledges taxpayer money or gives taxpayer property or gives to the developer the power of eminent domain to develop Georgia in whatever way they want.”

Adelman contends the legislation not only enables government entities to use the power of eminent domain to acquire property for public use but also for private use. Adelman says, “At best it is irresponsible and I would fully expect the Governor would repudiate this bill and that the leadership would back away from it.”

Sen. David Adelman, D-Decatur: “The people of this state should be very troubled by any legislation that gives unbridled discretion to local governments and the state to pledge taxpayer assets and convey taxpayer-owned property to private industry.”

Public-private partnership bill drawing biggest heat of session

DICK PETTYS
Associated Press

ATLANTA - At first glance it seems a nondescript bill filled with mind-numbing legal gobbledygook, but it has provoked the biggest public outcry by far of this year's edition of the Georgia Legislature.

One southwest Georgia newspaper editor has branded it “the most outrageously repugnant piece of legislative claptrap since the Yazoo Land Fraud,” comparing it to the 1795 scandal in which Georgia lawmakers were bribed to sell the state's western land claims for pennies an acre.

An Atlanta radio talk host is calling it “a full scale assault launched by Georgia developers on the private property rights of Georgians.”

Senate Bill 5, the legislation at the heart of the controversy, isn't one of Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue's initiatives, but it is backed by some of his top GOP allies, including Senate President Pro Tem Eric Johnson of Savannah, Republican Leader Bill Stephens of Canton and Rules Chairman Don Balfour of Snellville.

It would allow any government in Georgia to form a partnership with private developers to build and operate virtually anything that might be thought of as a public need, from roads and bridges to environmental facilities, parking decks and office buildings.

The law apparently would give local governments broad discretion in striking deals with private developers as to how the development would be financed.

However, they would have power to issue public debt for the public-private partnerships and to make grants or loans to the developers. They also would be allowed to condemn any property the developer believed was needed.

The developer would have the power to impose user fees for the project, collect lease payments or build additional projects on the land so long as they did not interfere with the original purpose of the project.

“This is very simply to accelerate the availability of new public infrastructure as an alternative to how cities and counties and state agencies build that infrastructure today,” said Sen. Dan Moody, R-Alpharetta, the main sponsor of the bill.

“I don't know of any one person who's driving this legislation for selfish gain at all, except to help cities and counties that have grown so fast that they cannot fund water treatment facilities, a jailhouse, a courthouse or a school,” he continued.

“These are the kinds of projects that could be done much faster because there is capital out there from people who are willing to invest in these projects if they know that there's a process that's laid out, that's crystal clear from beginning to end.”

But opposition is mounting, and not just from those with printing presses or microphones.

Sierra Club lobbyist Neill Herring calls the measure “a classic stealing bill.”

“I live in a small town. Let's say somebody's son-in-law gets elected to the city council. The next thing we know, they've put the Widow Brown off her place, built a sewage treatment plant on the creek down by her place and turned the pasture into a gated community, using the public taking power and leverage provided by public credit,” he said.

Sen. David Adelman, D-Decatur, another critic, said, “The people of this state should be very troubled by any legislation that gives unbridled discretion to local governments and the state to pledge taxpayer assets and convey taxpayer-owned property to private industry.”

Adelman said the legislation “opens the door wide to the big insiders, and is dangerous.”

In Bainbridge, Sam Griffin Jr., editor and publisher of The Post-Searchlight, wrote in an editorial this week that the idea of allowing governments to condemn private property and turn it over to private developers should be repudiated.

Comparing it to the Yazoo Land Fraud, he said if Perdue and his legislative majority don't quash the legislation, “folks will soon be hunting down the Georgia GOP with dogs.”

Talk show host Neal Boortz in Atlanta, whose listeners include many inside the gold-domed state Capitol, is calling it “a blatant assault on private property rights.”

One of Boortz's listeners is Jerry Griffin, executive director of the Association County Commissioners of Georgia, who said his group thinks the legislation isn't needed and believes “it's got some serious constitutional issues.”

“We're just not real sure what it was aimed at, but it doesn't appear it's anything needed by local governments.”

Lamar Norton, governmental relations director of the Georgia Municipal Association, said the group representing the state's mayors also has concerns. “We're still working to see if there is something we can salvage,” he said.

Johnson, the top Republican in the Senate, continues to defend the bill despite an editorial in his hometown newspaper, the Savannah Morning News, calling it “far removed from responsible, conservative public service.”

In an op-ed piece, Johnson wrote, “If Chatham County needs a new soccer complex, a contractor could build it with the agreement that they receive the concessions rights for 10 years. At the end of the agreed time, the soccer fields would be owned and operated by the local government just as if it had been built by the traditional method.”

The difference is, he argued, “Our children would have the fields to enjoy 10 years earlier than the taxpayers could have afforded to build them, if at all.”

—

Dick Pettys has covered Georgia government and politics since 1970

This entry was posted 3 years, 11 months ago on Tuesday, February 1st, 2005 at 9:58 am and is filed under LJ (Import). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.