This legislation amends the Transit Authority Act. It broadens the definition of "metropolitan area" to include any city, regardless of population, and the suburban area around it. It also requires an intergovernmental agreement when a new transit authority is created in an area where another transit authority or county public transit provider is already in operation.

This bill makes significant changes to taxation of motor fuel and creates a new single county local option TSPLOST. Click here for a detailed summary and here for additional information including county impact analysis.

This legislation amends the Urban Redevelopment Law to change "slum" to "pockets of blight."

County Impact: Will make it easier for local governments and development authorities to draw on federal grants for redevelopment in blighted areas.  

This legislation repeals the requirement that MARTA's ratio of operations to capital expenditures does not exceed 50/50. It also provides for a representative from Clayton county to sit on the MARTA board and makes the GRTA Executive Director a voting member. This legislation also provides for a process of appeal for citations issued in violation of authority rules and regulations.

County Impact:  For the three participating MARTA counties, this legislation provides for board representation from Clayton county as well as the northern part of DeKalb county. The removal of the 50/50 requirement on revenue spending for MARTA will provide the agency with more flexibility in its use of the revenue which will benefit the residents of the three participating counties. 

This legislation started off helping the Atlanta Beltline finance itself by allowing for contracts between local governments and the private sector. Language which would have required local governments to pay for the relocation of utilities located in the public rights-of-way was removed in the conference committee report that passed. ACCG commends conference committee members who worked to address counties' concerns.

Under this bill, a state or local government road or airport project that does not exceed $100 million does not have to go through the stringent requirements of the Environmental Policy Act.  However, an environmental evaluation will be considered in the decision-making process when it is probable to expect significant adverse impact on historical sites or buildings and cultural resources.