October 18, 2022

Nov. 2022 Amendments and Referenda - Georgia Ballot (EDIT)

Update, 10/26 -- After getting some input from a knowledgeable progressive friend, who quoted a well-connected Georgia consultant to Dem/progressive candidates, I have a different take on some of these. New comments in bold+italic. My apologies for any confusion created by the original post.

I'm clear on the candidates (D = Yes!), but I've been trying to get a handle on the ballot measures on the current Georgia ballot. I've posted descriptions of the initiatives below, along with my off-the-cuff reactions. I will update this if I get more substantive information or recommendations from trusted sources.

I'm generally suspicious of anything coming out of the Georgia legislature, but want to understand before casting a reflexive vote on any or all of these. Any input will be appreciated. General information about these can be found on Ballotpedia -- https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_2022_ballot_measures

Here's the list:

State Constitutional Amendment 1: Administration of government and Salaries of government officials (Senate Resolution No. 134; Resolution Act No. 304)
Allows the suspension of compensation of certain public officials while the individual is suspended from office for being indicted for a felony

- This sounds valid, but (realist that I am) I can see it being used to deep-six political enemies. I'm sure Kemp saw the Beck case as an opportunity to burnish his own credentials as a purported non-crook.
- Then again, Ballotpedia lists 2 Democratic Senate supporters of the amendment (one of whom I know and trust) in addition to the 19 Republican supporters, so I think I’m a Yes on this one.
- UPDATE: Voted Yes. The measure would reinstate back pay for an indicted official who’s exonerated and reinstated to office.

State Constitutional Amendment 2: Taxes (House Resolution No. 594; Resolution Act No. 803)
Authorizes local governments to grant temporary property tax changes for properties damaged by disaster events and located within disaster areas
- Again, seems reasonable, but I have to wonder, what rich Republican absentee owners of coastal property (for example) stand to benefit from this, what's the guarantee that the tax relief would be applied fairly, and how "temporary" is temporary?
- This is tax relief only, no direct aid to residents affected by natural disasters. Therefore, it does nothing for renters, and little for low-income and older property owners. As usual, Republicans see taxes as the Great Satan, and view direct aid as “taking.”
- The only supporters listed on Ballotpedia are six Republican state senators. Looks like a “No” to me.
- UPDATE: Voted Yes. This will help small business owners and home owners who would be devastated by climate disasters.

State Statute Referendum A: Taxes and natural resources (House Bill No. 997; Act No. 859)
Exempts timber equipment owned by a timber producer from ad valorem property taxes
- What’s the justification for this? The endorsement from Brian Kemp has all this feel-good blah-blah stuff about “conserving wild places” and says it would “protect hunting, fishing, and conservation land.” In reality, it looks like what it does is to let loggers off the hook for at least some property taxes, further impoverishing rural school districts and other public services.
- The measure has one Democratic supporter (State Rep. Debbie Buckner of District 137 in rural West Georgia), so maybe it’s got some merit, at least to her constituents. I could be talked out of it if I’m off base, but I’m still feeling like a “No” on this one.
- UPDATE: No change. The timber industry is successful and does not need a tax break. Voted No.

State Statute Referendum B: Taxes and Agriculture (House Bill No. 498; Act No. 260)
Expands a property tax exemption to include merged family farms and dairy products and eggs
- Supported by only Republicans per Ballotpedia (including Brian Kemp) and the Georgia Farm Bureau and Georgia Agribusiness Council.
- Again, it’s about reducing business property taxes, which it seems would deprive public coffers of much-needed revenue.
- Maybe this would help some small farmers hang on to their farms, but I’m guessing it’s aimed more at larger operations, including factory farms. Feeling like a “No” on this one, but again, I could be talked out of it if there’s a reasonable case for supporting it.
- UPDATE: Voted Yes. This helps smaller farmers, not just factory farms.