Tuesday, March 27, 2007

GAEDA love 'em

My concern with GAEDA since its inception was; 1. it took legislation sponsored by Rick Farrar to be able to create such an entity. 2. The board operates in a manner insulated by the city council from the voters. 3. It has the power to fee (tax) without direct voter approval.
In a recent Town Talk article, it was noted that plans for the area around city park were being held confidential. What kind of crap is that? Or is it a glimpse of more to come? Help me fill in the blanks please.


Anonymous said...

It was brought forward by Rick Farrar? Hmm...didn't know that...what would his interest be in GAEDA, when his district is the Pineville area?

bird said...

The actual revised statute listed on GAEDA's website is the one referenced in the ACT passed to create GAEDA. However, it was changed to .60 from .55. Bo Curtis introduced the legislation. He first amended legislation regarding ACCED and then introduced the language creating GAEDA.

I don't know what legislation you are referring to from Rick Farrar. Please post the original bill number or act.

Spanky said...

That was a curve ball to see if anyone was paying attention. The nuts and bolts concept of whether another layer of government that is insulated from the voters that can tax and spend is my main concern. I assert that it is not a good thing and only complicates the free market functions that drive commerce. I can be wrong and would love to hear any argument as to why I am. Sincerely