Box 21, Folder 4, Complete Folder

Box 21, Folder 4, Complete Folder

ROUTE
SLIP
TO:
FROM:
~
D
R. EARL LANDERS
you, info,mation
Please refer to the attached correspondence and make the
necessary reply.
D
Advise me the status of the attached.
L¼,
""J-
e
/.Z c-.z!.~.& t?
r-;,A:..
r., .· . . .- . -
I \
FORM 25-4-L
-1 4.:. !
i
'
�~SLIP~
TO :
FROM :
~
D
Ivan Allen, Jr.
r your inform a tion
Please refer to the attach d cor_respon dence and make the
necessary reply.
D
F ORM 25 - 4
Advi se me the s t a t s of th e atta ched.
�TO:
FROM:
Ivan Allen, Jr.
~ o r your information
D
Ple as e refer to the a ttached correspondence and make the
necessary reply.
0
FORM 25 -4
A dvise me the status of the attached .
�FROM:
Ivan Allen, Jr.
0
For your information
0
Please refer to the att a ched correspondence and make the
necessary reply.
0
FORM 2 5 - 4
Advise me the status of the a ttached.
�-
. .Atemo / /
I
DATE
'
From CHARLESL.DA~S
�Please distribute the attached copies
to the aldermen.
�RA.PID TRA.NSIT
,·


PROGRESS


METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
"
ARTA
REPORTS TO THE PEOPLE IT SERVES . . . "
JANUARY 1967
VOL. 2, NO.
I
STATE BUDGET PROPOSES
$500,000 FOR MARTA IN 1968-69
The state budget for fiscal 1968-1969, now being considered by the General Assembly, includes a request for
$500,000 for the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority. This amount would be the first state funds
granted to MARTA; the grant is possible under the provisions of Constitutional Amendment 14, passed in the
November 1966 General Election.
Governor Lester Maddox , in his budget address to the
General Assembly, January 13, included the request under
a section on "Development Proposals." After outlining his major programs, the Governor stated, "Other
major proposals included in the budget I am submitting today include (a
proposal to) . . . provide $250.000
in each of the fi scal years of the
biennium to match federal and local
fund s for Rapid Transit in Atlanta
as soon as the Authority qualifies for
Gov. L ester Maddox
the assistance."
The request was part of the proposed budget drawn by
former Gov. Carl Sanders in conferences with then-Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Lester Maddox and Republican Gubern atorial Candidate Howard "Bo" Callaway.
Sanders called a news conference Dec. 21 to afifiounce
the budget request fo r rapid transit. After announci ng the
req uest for the half-million dollars, Sanders stated, "I
earnestly hope that this is just the first installment of State
support for the rapid transit system here in Atlanta. The
"We expect to apply for federal funds of four times this
amount, using the State's appropriation as the local matching funds. This $500,000 thus will become $2,500,000
with the approval of federal funds on a four to one basis."
Stuart noted that "The total construction cost of the entire 66-mile system will be about $43 7 million. The basic
system (North-South and East-West lines) will cost about
$310 million to get into operation. It is our hope that in the
next 20 to 30 years the State will be able to provide the
maximum amount allowed under the law, which is 10 per
cent of the total cost. If this amount is provided, and the
maximum amount of federal funds are forthcoming, the
amount required from the City of Atlanta and the counties
of Fulton, DeKalb, Clayton , and Gwinnett will not be
excessive."
Others present at the news conference included Roy A.
Blount, MARTA Vice Chairman; Augustus H. Sterne,
President of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce; Alvin
Ferst, Chairman of the Chamber's Rapid Transit Committee; Fulton Rep. Jack Etheridge; Curtis Driskell, Director
of Metropolitan Affairs of the Chamber; and King Elliott,
MART A Public Information Director.
problem of moving people rapidly and effectively is one
that faces all of our urban areas, but it is most acute here
in our Capital City."
"We cannot stop improving our highways-and I might
say that a fourth of Georgia's highway money has gone
into the Atlanta area in the past four years-but we cannot
depend upon highways alone to solve our problems."
"That is why this initial State grant is so important. We
are backing up our legislative support with hard cash, and
now the project can really get under way."
Henry L. Stuart, General Manager of MART A, responded with words of appreciation for the request, and explained, "The appropriation announced today will allow the
Authority to proceed with the detailed design of portions
of the rapid transit system and with some right-of-way
acquisition."
Gov. Cnrl Sanders, with MARTA Vice Chairman Roy A.
Blount (left) and General Manager H enry L. Stuart (right) .
�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
808 GLENN BLOG .• 12 0 MARIETTA ST .. N. W .
ATLANTA. GA . 30303 • PHONE 524 , 5711
and expense, not to mention frayed nerves from rush hour
traffic."
"We need a rapid transit system," Atwood concludes,
"to keep Atlanta on the move."
"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRAIii SiT SYSTEM FOR THE S-COUNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA."
HOUSE COMMITTEE ASKS FULL
STATE SUPPORT FOR MARTA
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
RICHARD H. RICH, Chairman
ROY A . BLOUNT, V ice Chairman
ROBERT F. ADAMSON, Treasurer
GLENN E. BENNETT, S ecr etary
CITY OF ATLANTA:
MILLS B . LANE, JR.
L. D. MILTON
RICHARD H. RICH
RAWSON HAVERTY
CLAYTON COUNTY :
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
DR. SANFORD ATWOOD
ROY A. BLOUNT
FULTON COUNTY :
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
W. A . PULVER
GWINNETT COU NTY :
K . A . MCMILLON
COBB COUNTY (Obser ver)
OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR.
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L. STUART, Gen er al Manager
KING E LLIOTT, Director of Public l?i formation
H. N. JOH NSON, S ecr etary to General Mana ger
EDUCATOR NOTES URGENT NEED
FOR RAPID TRANSIT
"Hover over Atlanta in a helicopter at five o'clock in the
afternoon. Look at the freeways and city streets jammed
with thousands of cars inching their way home, and you
know Atlanta needs a rapid transit system NOW," says
MART A Board member Dr. Sanford Atwood.
"From the air, downtown Atlanta seems like one vast
parking lot, a sea of cars surrounding lines of shiny new
office buildings," says Atwood, President of Emory University.
"A rapid transit system won't solve all our transportation
problems, but a glance at the city
from the air is a graphic lesson. There
is a limit to how much land can be
devoted to freeways and parking lots.
T here is a limit to the patience of the
commuter and the amount of time
and money he is wiling to spend to
get to downtown Atlanta," Atwood
continues. ·
"A rapid transit system can save
.
, Dr. Sanford Atwood
valuable land for more productive
uses. It can save millions of wasted hours Atlantans now
spend getting to and from work or recreation. In the
long run , rapid transit can save the citizens of Metropolitan Atlanta and their visitors millions of dollars in time
The House State and Local Government Study Committee, in its final report, recommends that the state provide the
full 10 percent of the total cost of the rapid transit system.
The Committee, with Rep. Wayne Snow, Jr., of Chickamauga, as chairman, filed its final report in December.
Henry L. Stuart, MART A General Manager, and Rep.
Jack Etheridge, MARTA Counsel, appeared before the
Committee at the State Capitol Dec. 9. The two discussed
the impact the system will have on the Metropolitan area
and the entire state, as well as the present programs and
future plans.
The Committee report summarizes the testimony and
makes its recommendation as follows:
· "The Metropolitan Atlanta R apid
Transit Authority appeared before the
Committee and presented the pro·
posed cost of the system for the Atlanta area. With the passage of Constitutional Amendment No. 14 at the
General Election in 1966, the state is
authorized to participate in the
amount of 10% of the total cost of
the system. T he total cost of buildR ep. Way ne Snow, Jr. ing the system over the next fifteen
to twenty years will be an estimated $437 million. The
Atlanta Authority is able to utilize the free information
from the San Francisco Authority which is some three years
advanced on the Atlanta program. T hose of us who travel
to Atlanta frequently and hold considerable pride for our
capital city, its progress, and its contribution to the state
and the Southeast are too frequently reminded of the inadequacy of the present system of freeways and the daily
drudgery endured by those who must commute at a snail's
pace back and forth thereon.
"We are advised that 55 % of the real property in the City
of Atlanta is now non-income-producing and that the city
can ill afford to give up more income-producing property
to costly freeways.
"We recommend that the state bear its 10% of the cost
of this system as the participating counties and metropolitan
Atlanta appropriate their funds."
Members of the House of Representatives serving on the
Committee were Wayne Snow, Jr., of the 1st District,
Chairman; Lionel E. Drew, Jr., 116th; Devereaux F. McClatchey, 138th; Roscoe Thompson, 111th ; Reid W. Harris,
85th ; William M. F leming, Jr .. 106th; Roger W . Wilson,
109th ; W. M . Williams, 16th; Will iam S. Lee. 79th; Jerry
Lee Minge, 13th ; Harry Mixon, 81st; and Dr. Albert Sidney
Johnson, Sr., 25th.
ATLANTA TO HOST TWO TRANSIT CONVENTIONS IN 1967
May 24-26-The Annual Meeting of the INSTITUTE FOR RAPID TRANSIT will be held at the
Marriott Motor Hotel. The IRT is composed of
members from all aspects of rapid transit.
Oct. 22-26-The annual meeting of the AMERICAN
TRANSIT ASSOCIATION will be held at the
Regency-Hyatt House. The ATA bas as members
only those operating transit systems (railroads, bus
lines, rapid transit, etc.)
�HUD GRANTS MARTA $369,000
An application by the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid 1:ransit
authority for $369,333 in federal funds was approved m late
December. The announcement of the grant was made D ec.
21 in Washington jointly by Georgia Senators Richard B.
R ussell and Herman Talmadge, and by Secretary Robert
C. We~ver, U. S. Department of H ousing and Urban Development.
T he orant was the nation's first T echnical Studies Program
Grant ~uthorized by a 1966 amendment to the Urban Mass
Transportation Act. The federal funds will be matc~ed by
$184,667 in local funds which are on hand or committed. Assistant Secretary Charles M. Haar noted tha~ HUD
"does not regard a transportation system as something that can be superimposed on a city after all else is
planned or built." H aar continued,
"It is our firm conviction that transportation systems are a vital component of metropolitan development,
and effective metropolitan planning
must bring the people operating the
system into the planning process at
Charles M . Haar
an early stage of deliberation."
As Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development.
H aar has an overall responsibility for HUD's programs of
planning standards and coordination as well as the Urban
Mass Transportation Program.
"The basic purpose of the new orogr?m", Haar said, _"is
to bridge the gap between federally-assisted tr~nsportat!on
planning of an overall nature, and _federal!~-~ss1sted cap1!al
improvements in mass transportation fac1ht1es_ and equ~pment, by providing funds for prelim_inary functional_ stud1~s
of basic need, priority, and engineermg and economic feasibility."
"The $554,000 program will finance the follo~ing work :
completion of preliminary engineeri~g _on exten~10ns _to the
North-South Line; most of the prehmmarv engmeermg on
the East-West Line, and extensions to 1-285 at each end of
the Line; a Rapid Transit Corridor Impact Study; and a:1
Impa.ct study of the proposed system on the Atlanta Transit
System.
BOARD MEMBERS MAKE FIELD
SURVEY
Members of the MARTA Board of Directors were shown
some of the various routes under consideration for the
Central, Northeast, East, and West Lines on two field trips
in January. The directors were escorted on the tours _by
members of the engineering consultant firm, Parsons-Brmckerhoff Tudor and Bechtel.
The directors plan to tour the routes being studied for the
South Line as soon as preliminary engineering reaches the
staoe which would make a tour meaningful.
The present development schedule calls for completion of
preliminary engineering by the end of 1967. At the proper
time, tours will be arranged for cTcy and county officials
associated in MARTA, as well as for members of the news
media. Also, as provided in the MART A Act, public hearings will be conducted to acquaint citizens with the plans
and route locations before final decisions are made.
In the pictures above and below , engineers are ex_p':aining_ how
portions of the rapid transit system _ could f oll_ow ex1strng ra,/road
lin es. The location is Southern Raz /way at P1edm o11t R oad.
IS YOUR ADDRESS CORRECT?
Please check the address on page 4; if it is incorrect pl~ase
make corrections, and return to MARTA, 808 Glenn Bmld mg,
Atlanta, Ga., 30303
Or if you would like to have RAPID TRANSi'.[ PROGRESS
sent to a friend, just fill out the form_ and return 1t to MARTA,
808 Glenn Building, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303
NAME__ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
ADDRESS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
CITY_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _STATE,_ __ _~IP_ __
(PLEASE INCLUDE ZIP CODE)
�RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS1966 ROUND-UP
MARTA ACTION
MONTREAL The newest rapid transit system in the western hemisphere began operations October 14, 1966. The
Montreal METRO, patterned after the Paris METRO, has
16 miles of underground railway, with 26 stations, each
station designed by a different architect. The METRO was
built by the city thru its Public Works Department, without
financial help from superior governments, at a cost of
$2 13,700,000. T he trains travel on rubber tires , running
on concrete tracks, and they are powered by electricity.
There are 41 nine-car trains, th e usual train used during
rush hours; each car will seat 40 persons, with standing
room for 120 more passengers. Another line, to be opened
this Spring, will take passengers to "Expo 67", the international exhibition which begins April 28.
SAN FRANCISCO Contracts for more than $250 million
in construction work had been awarded by the end of 1966,
to build 34 miles of the 75 mile Bay Area Rapid Transit
system. Contracts totalling $300 million will be let in 1967
for another 24 miles of th e system. Construction under
way includes subway, aerial, and ground level sections; the
four-mile underwater Trans-Bay Tube, and a three-milelong twin-bore transit tunnel through the Berkeley Hills
east of Oakland. BART passenger service is scheduled to
begin on some East Bay lines in mid-1969; San Francisco
and Trans-Bay service will commence in early 1970.
BALTIMORE The Metropolitan Transit Authority has
recommended an initial $225 million phase of rapid transit
construction for Metropolitan Baltimore. The initial phase
is for two radial lines plus portions of a downtown inner
city rail transit loop; the full system under study calls for
six radial rapid lines, an inner city downtown loop, plus express and feeder buses. The MT A recommendation went
to the Metropolitan Area Council for approval in early
January.
LOS ANGELES The Southern California Rapid Transit
District has approved $2,625,000 in contracts for preliminary planning and engineering for the first phase of a rapid
transit system.
In its January meeting, the MARTA Board of
Directors approved amendments to the contract with
engineering consultants (Parsons-Brinckerhoff-TudorBechtel) to cover work to be performed under the new
HUD Section 9 grant of $369,333. The General
Manager was authorized to execute appropriate contract with HUD for the funds, subject to review by the
Board.
The Board changed the date of the February meeting because several members will be absent from the
city. The next meeting will be Wednesday, February
15, at 3:30 p.m., in Room 619, the Glenn Building,
instead of February 7.
NEW YORK The New York City Transit Authority has
ordered 400 new subway cars, and is asking for $220 million in additional funds for improvements and extensions
in the 1967-68 fiscal year. Plans are being made for a· new
subway tunnel under the East River between Queens and
Manhattan.
BOSTON The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's Advisory Board approved a $346 million "Master
Plan" for improvements and expansion.
WASHINGTON, D.C. An interstate rapid transit compact
was signed in November, creating the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. WMATA will replace
the National Capital Transportation Agency in September.
Congress has authorized construction of a 25-mile subway
and rail rapid transit system to cost $431 million. Plans call
for the system to be in operation by 1972.
EGYPT Experts are currently studying the city of Cairo,
seeking routes for what will be Africa's first subway transportation system. The first line will run north to south
along the east bank of the Nile River; a second line is
planned to go under the Nile.
TORONTO 14.5 miles of route is · being added to the
Toronto subway system at a cost of $284 million. The new
8.5 mile Bloor-Danforth subway opened in February.
R.Al?ID TRANSIT
M ETROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
BOB GLENN BLDG.
·
1 20MARIETTA ST . , N.W.
PHONE 524-5711 (AREA CODE 404)
~1
·
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
�RA.PID TRA.NSIT
IGOG
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
"MARTA
REPORTS TO THE
PEOPLE IT SERVES . . .
DECEMBER 1966
VOL. I . NO. 3
PBTB, MARTA DIRECTORS
MEET IN ATLANTA
Eight members of the board of directors (Board of Control) of Parsons-Brinckerhoff Tudor-Bechtel, engineering
consultants to the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority, met in Atlanta with the MARTA board of directors December 5. Both boards of directors received a briefing on the status of development of the Atlanta rapid transit
system.
Members of PBTB attending were W. S. Douglas, Senior
Partner, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas; M. Den
Hartog, Partner, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Lord & Den Hartog;
W. 0. Salter, Vice President, PBQ&D, and director of the
MARTA project; J. R. Kiely, Senior Vice President, Bechtel
Corporation ; John P. Buehler, Vice President, Bechtel Corporation; Louis Riggs, President, Tudor Engineering Corporation; Stan Froid, Vice President, Tudor Engineering Corporation ; and W. A. Bugge, Project Director, PBTB.
The PBTB board members attendoo the December board
meeting of MARTA directors, then entertained MARTA
directors at a dinner meeting where the system was discussed
in further detail.
John Coil, PBTB Resident Manager in Atlanta, escorted ·
the PBTB directors on tours of the various lines under consideration for the Atlanta system, including the railroad
"gulch" area downtown , where Transit Center will be
located.
The Atlanta PBTB staff showed aerial photographs of the
area, and discussed various alignments of the system lines.
Several proposals for subway locations and levels were
outlined.
Phil Hammer, of Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, discussed several methods of financing the first two phases of
the Atlanta System. Under the basic plan, predicated on
maximum federal and state aid, local funds of approximately $100 million would be required for the two principal
lines to be constructed for about $3 10 million. If the local
part is received through 30-year revenue bonds, the maximum tax cost would be about two mills in F ulton County ·
where assessments are lowest, and less in the other governments participating in MARTA.
Richard H. Rich (left), MART A Chairman; Stan Froid, Tudor V-P;
Martin Den Hartog, PBL&DH; Win 0. Salter, PBQ&D V-P; Henry
L . Stuart, MARTA General Manager; W. A. Bugge, PBTB; W. A .
Pulver, MARTA Director.
Ray O'Neil, PBTB Deputy Resident Manager explains route alignments on aerial mosaic map.
�M
M
DE
1966
1967
1968
NORTH-SOUTH LINE
Oglethorpe to
Airport, thru
Transit Center
21.5 miles,
16 stations.
Construction cost:
$201 Million
Opens 1973
1972
1973
1974
ts, Railro ds)
ght-of-w
Detailed
Acquisit on,
esign
Co structio
EAST-WEST LINE
Avondale Estates
to Hightower Rd.
thru Transit
Center
14.5 miles,
13 stations
Construction cost
$106 million
Opens 1975
EXTENSIONS COMPLETING SYSTEM
Norcross, Forest
Park, N. Druid
Hills Rd. (Proposed Marietta
line included)
29.4 miles,
13 stations
Construction cost
$130 million
Co mplete 1983
s
IT
A
Prelimi
ering (Sec 9)
ons
Ri ht-of-wa
acqui tion, det
ginee rin g (Sec. 9 )
Pr
•
ublic Heb ings
Negl
•
-way ac uisita iled de ign
(NOTE:
EAST-
led desig
J•
F
I
I
INS AF E
PLETED.
T he above chart and the map on the oppos ite page outline some of the work being done and plans for the future
development of th e rapid transit system in Metropolitan
Atl anta.
T he chart shows a "working schedule" rather than a precise timetable, and is subject to change. On the North-South
line, " Preliminary E ngi neering (702 ) " is fin anced with a
loan under Section 702 of the U. S. Housing Act of 1954.
"Prelim inary E ngi nee ring ( Sec. 9)" a nticipates approval of
an application under Section 9 of the Mass Transportat ion
A ct of 1966 fo r $369,333 . T hese funds will also provide
for pl anning to extend East-West line on each end to I -28 5
perimeter expressway.
T he beginn ing of "Acquisition of R ight-of-way and detailed design" of the North-South line is based on the pros-
a tion s
I Report
NORTH- OUTH A
pect of state funds and additional federal funds . With the
passage of Constitutional A mendment 14 in the November
General E lection, th e state can now appropriate funds to
assist in rapi d tra nsit development. If the new General Assembly approves such an appropriat ion , application will then
be made for fou r times the a moun t in federal funds. Tf such
fun ds become ava il able, purchasing of right-of-way and
drafting of detai led des igns could begin after July 1, 1967.
In itial work would like ly begin on Transit Center in downtow n Atl a nta , where the North-South and East-West lines
will cross.
On the map on the opposite page, the lines of the original
1962 plan are in black; the green lines show alternate lines
being considered. Final lines will be determined in 1967.
�~~
r------~--
/
-..___,.V\_
I
'
~
'
!
\
I
NORTHEAST LINE
METR O P OLITAN
SYSTEM
PROPO S ED
SEPTE MBE R
1962
"
MIL~ $
INITIAL O PERATIONS
COLLEGE
I I I I
1975
1980
Cf') C [C, )
PARK
PARK
AL TERNA TE ROUTES
UNDER CONSIDERATION
�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
MARTA ACTION
808 GLENN BLOG ." 120 MARIETTA ST .. N . W .
ATLANTA, GA . 30303 · PHONE 524 -57 11
In the December meeting, the MARTA Board of
Directors re-elected present officers to another oneyear term. Richard H. Rich will continue to serve as
MARTA Chairman, and Roy A. Blount as Vice
Chairman.
The board also approved the budget for 1966. Total
income and unappropriated surplus are expected to be
$810,871.98; total expenses will be $764,448.00; a
surplus of $46,423 .98 is anticipated.
The income anticipates approval of a pending application for a fed eral grant under Section 9 of the Mass
Transportation Act of 1966. The application is for
$369,333 , of which $276,00Q would be spent in 1967,
and $93,333 in 1968. The local support from Atlanta
and Fulton, DeKalb, Clayton, and Gwinnett counties
remains the same as 1966-$300,000 on a _pro rata
basis.
The 1967 budget will provide funds for completion
of the preliminary engineering on the North-South
line ; for most of the preliminary engineering on the
East-West line; additional work on the North-South
line; Rapid Transit Corridor Impact Study; a study of
the impact of the proposed system on the Atlanta
Transit System ; and other work.
"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE 5-COUNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA." "
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
H. RICH, Chairman
ROY A. BLOUNT, Vic e Chair111.an
ROBERT F. ADAMSON, Treasur er
GLE NN E . BENNETT, S ecretary
RICHARD
CITY OF ATLANTA:
MILLS B. LA NE, JR.
L. D. MILTON
RICHARD H. R ICH
RAWSON HAVERTY
CLAYTON COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKA LB COUNTY :
Roy A . BLOUNT
DR. SANFORD AT WOOD
FULTON COUNTY:
W. A. P ULVER
MITCHE LL C. BISHOP
GWINNETT COUNTY :
K. A. MCMILLON
COBB COUNTY (Observer )
OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR
MARTA STAFF :
HENRY L . STUART, General Manager
KING ELLIOTT, Director of Public Information
H. N. JOH NSON, S ecr etar1J to General Manager
RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS
A study committee of the Georgia House of Representatives has been briefed on the status of rapid transit in Atlanta. On December 9, MARTA General Manager Henry
L. Stuart and Rep . Jack Ethridge, legal counsel for the
Authority, appeared before the State of Local Governments
Study Committee.
Rep. Ethridge pointed out that rapid transit is going to
benefit residents of many counties outside the area encompassed by the Authority itself. He stated that, in several
nearby counties, more than half the people who have jobs
are employed in Atlanta, and could be expected to drive to
the nearest rapid transit station to "park and ride."
,
'
.}.t.. -~ .....
0
1!"#
-
-·--·
,~
', •
.::..._:·1...~.--.&l..w.
'
0
I
~ . A · ~ .........
1
•
t,
i . . . . ...__,____J_..i_.J.l ____.... _
R.A..PID TR.A..NSIT
PROGRESS
i ....
'i'
I ..
....
~
Stuart discussed the system itself, its cost,_and methods
of fin ancing the work. He noted that through 1966, local
governments had spent $790,000 from local funds on the
project, and $730,000 in federal funds . He said that while
the state has not bee n ab le to participate financially in the
project, passage of A mendment 14 in November will now
allow th e state to take part. H e stated th at he is "encouraged" in his belief that th e next budget will include an
allocation for rapid transit.
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
--
BOB GLENN BLDG. · 1 20 MARIETTA ST ., N.W.
PHON E 524-5711 (AREA CODE 404)
DECEMBER
~1
196 6
•
VOL.
I.
NO.
3
·
ATLANTA . GEORGIA 30303
'
•
~
---
\
....... _..,·..1..~.-
•
•
,',:
'
1
_••. ·:_~."'_._
i,c
., I\
•,
.
·._
,"
•
�R..A.l?ID 'I·R..A.NSIT
PIGOGRESS
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
" "'1\ K"A-c::, rn A
..1..v..1..
~..1......ci.
REPORTS TO THE PEOPLE IT SERVES . .. , '
NOVEMBER 1966
VOL.. 1. NO. 2
SPECIAL ELECTION ISSUE 11
VOTERS APPROVE
AMENDMENT14
Georgia voters approved the proposed Constitutional
Amendment 14 by a 55 per cent vote in the November 8
General Election. The final votes, tabulated on November
22, showed that 241,654 voted "YES," while 196,501 voted
"NO," giving the Amendment a margin of 45,153 votes. The
largest majorities were in F ulton and DeKalb Counties,
which voted nearly 70 per cent for the amendment; Clayton
County approved it with a 50.2 per cent vote. The amendment missed approval in Gwinnett County, receiving a 44.7
per cent vote, while Cobb County again rejected Rapid
Transit with a 39.6 per cent vote.
The amendment, as approved by the majority of Georgia
voters, will allow, but not require, the state to participate in
building a rapid transit system in Metropolitan Atlanta. The
wording of the amendment specifically limits the state's participation to " 10 per cent of the total cost." The total cost
of building the system will be $437 million over the next
15 to 20 years.
The successful vote on the amendment can be attributed
in a large part to the efforts of former Governor Ernest
Vandiver. On October 19, Vandiver announced the reactivation of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit COMMITTEE OF 100, in an enlarged, statewide scope. The
former governor, Chairman of the COMMITTEE OF 100
since its formation in 1963, stated, "I feel that the approval
of Amendment 14 is essential, and that approval will depend on an intensive, statewide effort."
"It is my opinion," he continued, "that the COMMITTEE OF 100, enlarged to include members from 13 larger
cities across the state, is the best means of informing Georgia voters of what this Amendment will do."
Vandiver further announced his selection of M. C. Bishop
of College Park to serve as Executive Director of the COMMITTEE OF 100 during the informational effort. Bishop,
member of the MARTA Board of Directors, has been engaged in business enterprises for a number of years, reaching into many Georgia cities.
Under the direction of Bishop, business, civic, and governmental leaders were invited to attend meetings at which
the proposed amendment would be discussed. A total of
610 persons attended the 12 luncheon, dinner, or breakfast
meetings across the state. Presentations were made in
Augusta, Savannah, Brunswick, Waycross, Albany, and Valdosta by M. C. Bishop; in Gainesville and Athens by King
Elliott, MARTA Public Information Director, and by Robert Coultas, Rapid Transit representative of the General
E lectric Company; in Columbus by E lliott and Tom Watson
Brown, Atlanta attorney; in Carrollton and Rome by Curtis
Driskell, Director of Metropolitan Affairs for the Atlanta
Chamber of Commerce and by Coultas; and in Macon by
William P. Corley, Vice President of Infoplan. All meetings
were well-reported by local news media.
"By approving this amendment, Georgians have shown
their awareness of the problems facing urban areas in the
fi eld of transportation, and their willingness to allow the
state to provide financial assistance where possible," Vandiver noted. "I am optimistic," he concluded, "that the next
General Assembly will include an allocation for the Rapid
Transit system now being developed in Atlanta."
Former Governor Ernest Vandiver, Chairman of COMMITTEE OF
100, explains Amendment 14 at Athens luncheon m eeting; King
Elliott, MART A Public Information Director, is seated at his left.
ELECTION ISSUE
�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
808 G LENN BLDG . • 120 MARIETTA ST .• N . W .
ATLAN T A, GA. 30303 · PHONE 524-5711
" DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE S·COUN_T.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA .""
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
-'
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
RICHARD H . RICH, Chairman
Roy A . BLOUNT, Vice Chairman
ROBERT F. ADAMSON, Treasurer
GLENN E. BENNETT, S ecretary
CITY OF ATLANTA :
L. D. MILTON
M ILLS B . LANE. Jn.
RAWSON H AVERTY
RICHARD H. R ICH
CLAYTO N COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
D R. SANFORD ATWOOD
ROY A. BLOUNT
FULTON COUNTY:
W. A. PULVER
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
GWINNETT COUNTY :
K. A. MCMILLON
360,000 SEE
COBB COUNTY (Observer )
OTIS A . BRUMBY, JR.
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L. STUART, Gener al M anager
KING ELLIOTT. Director of Public Information
H. N. JOH NSON, S ecretary to General Manager
"RAPID TRANSIT IS A 'MUST'
II
"The great additions to Atlanta, such as major league
baseball and football, new auditorium, cultural centers, and
other metropolitan improvements will soon lose their
glamour if something isn't done to make more pleasant ~e
trips to and from," says Roy A. Blount, MARTA Vice
Chairman. Blount, President of the
Decatur Federal Savings and Loan
Association adds, "The excitement of
a game or opera or play soon gives
way to the exasperation of getting
home."
"Rapid Transit for Metropolitan
Atlanta will not answer all our traffic
problems, but will go a long way
toward the solution of moving local
traffic, allowing expressways to indeed be expr ess ways," he continues.
R oy A. Blount
The erection and completion of the
system will benefit every Georgian. New industry and
distribution facilities will be attracted, when it is found that
their employees can get back and forth to work with greater
ease and less expense."
Experiences in other areas reveal improvement in property values, upgrading of "business slums," and general improvement of appearance of areas not only adjacent to the
lines, but in wide sections of outlying metropolitan areas."
Blount concludes, "Rapid Transit is a MUST for Atlanta, now!"
Gov. Vandiver named the following to the expanded
COMMITTEE OF 100: Griffin R. Smith, Cartersville;
Julian H . Cox, Athens; Robert C. Norman, Augusta; Anton F. Solms, Jr., Savannah; Judge Harold Ward, Dublin;
John Langdale, Valdosta; Howell Hollis, Columbus; Thomas
E . Greene, Jr., Macon; James C. Owen, Jr., Griffin; James
Dunlap, Gainesville; William Huffman, Rome; J. Ebb Duncan, Carrollton ; and Asa D. Kelley, Albany.
An estimated 350,000 persons visited the Rapid Transit
display in the Metro Atlanta area during October and early
November. The New "SCOT"-Steel Car of Tomorrowdrew its biggest crowds while on exhibit at the Southe~stern
Fair Oct. 1-8. An estimated 250,000 of the total Fair attendance of over 387,000 visited the prototype of the Rapid
Transit car.
The exhibit was officially opened by Atlanta Vice Mayor
Sam Massell, Jr., with Richard H. Rich, Chairman of the
MARTA Board of Directors, cutting the ribbon. R. C.
Rhodes, Manager of Sales, represented United States Steel
.
Corporation, developer of the New SCOT.
Among the visitors to the exhibit was Mrs. Munel
H umphrey, wife of Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey.
Mrs. Humphrey expressed great interest in the display, remarking that similar vehicles may be in service in Washington in a few years. A $431 million subway program has
been approved for the nation's capital.
Vice Mayor Sam Massei/, Jr., (L); R . C. Rhodes, United States Steel
Corporation, and R ichard H . R ich, M A R T A Chairman
�STUART REPORTS ON
TRANSIT CONVENTION
Henry L. Stuart, MARTA General Manager, attended
the Annual Convention of the American Transit Association, which met in San Francisco in October. In addition to
attending the sessions of the convention, Stuart also surveyed the progress being made in the billion-dollar San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit System , now under construction. He was accompanied by John Coil, resident manager
in Atlanta for Parsons-Brinckerhoff Tudor-Bechtel, engineering consultants for MARTA; and by Robert L. Sommerville, President of the Atlanta Transit System.
Stuart reports , "The construction in Oakland is moving
in an orderly manner. Subway openings are being constructed, but stations for the subways have not yet begun.
The surface and aerial lines in East Bay are also progressing. All of this construction is bigger in sheer size and impact than anything seen in Atlanta, with the possible exception of the downtown connectors."
SCOT CAR
Atlanta Mayor Emeritus William B. Hartsfield escorted
Mrs. Humphrey to the SCOT car exhibit, where J. J . Lyons,
representative of the United States Steel Corporation, explained the concept of the vehicle.
After the Fair closed, the New SCOT was on display for
one week each at Rich's downtown, North DeKalb Center,
and Cobb Center. The final showing of the prototype of the
ra pid transit car was at the Georgia Exposition of Commerce and Industry November 1-6 at the Marriott Motor
Hotel.
Those viewing the exhibit had many favorab le comments
and sincere questions; the one recurring question was "When
will I be able to ride a car like this in Atlanta?" When the
answer of " 1972 or 1973 " was given , the uniform comment
was "I sure wish we had this running in Atlanta NOW!"
The display was a joint project of United States Steel
Co rporation and the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority.
Robert L. Sommerville (L), John Coil, and H enry Stuart look over
subway con_struction work in San Francisco . Overhead is a gas pipeline
which has been re-routed during subway construction.
M ayor Em eritus Wi lliam B. Hartsfield (L); M rs. M uriel Humphrey;
and J. J. Lyons, V . S . Steel Corp ., Atlanta
"The more difficult projects are started first," he notes,
"because they take so much longer to co mplete. The easier
projects begin later, so that the several projects are completed at approximately the same time. We expect to follow a similar pattern in Atlanta, beginning construction of
the very complex North-South line first, then the shorter
and more simple East-West line, and completing both at
about the same time.
" San Francisco is working on two major projects which
will not have counterparts in Atlanta. T hese are the twin
tubes underneath the Bay, and the tunnel through Mt.
Diablo. The Trans-Bay Tubes will be the major engineering marvel of our time when the project is completed. The
other projects will be quite similar to the planned system
here in Atlanta," Stuart concluded, "and we intend to observe closely the San Francisco system, to benefit from
their experience in building a modern Rapid Transit
System."
�ENGINEERS REPORT PROGRESS
MARTA ACTION
Revision of the 1962 plan for a Rapid Transit System in
Metropolitan Atlanta continues to make satisfactory progress, according to John Coil, Resident Manager for ParsonsBrinckerhoff Tudor-Bechtel. Engineers have completed the
location of the lines running to the east and to the west
from Transit Center, ~nd have completed a detailed study
for the line running north from Transit Center to the Pershing Point area.
Alternate routes from Pershing Point to the northeast are
being studied. These routes include direct service to the
Buckhead area as well as the route shown in the 1962 report along the Southern Railway to Lenox Square and on
to the northeast.
In the October meeting, the MARTA Board of Directors approved an application for federal funds from
the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The request was for $369 ,333 under Section 9
of the Urban Mass Transit Act of 1966. The funds
would be spent largely for preliminary engineering on
the East-West line.
The Board also unanimously passed a resolution
endorsing Amendment 14 and urging its approval.
In the November meeting, the Board ·approved the
appointment of a financial advisory group to the Authority. The group is composed of Robinson-Humphrey Company, Inc., and Courts and Company, both of
Atlanta; and White, Weld and Company of New York
City.
RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS
FULTON SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE Stonewall Dyer
Nov. 2 dismissed a suit seeking to declare Amendment 14
unconstitutional. The suit was brought by Wayne Gossett,
a Republican candidate for Cobb County District 33 post
in the State Senate. Judge Dyer ruled that there was no
legal basis for the suit.
Wa lter S. Douglas, S enior Partn er of Parsons-Brinck erhoff-QuadeDoug/as (L ) a11d H enry L. Stuart, G eneral Manager MARTA, are
hrought up to date on engineering changes by R ay O'Neil, deputy
R eside11t Manager, and by John Coil, R esident Manager.
Preliminary engineering on the section between Transit
Center and Pershing Point, including studies of the rock formations, utilities, and detailed alignment of the subway
north from Transit Center is being prepared.
Development of several alternate routes to provide service to the south of the city represents the major current
effort by the engineers. This should be completed in about
six weeks.
"RAPID TRANSIT PROGRESS" is reaching its readers late in the month this issue. This "Election Issue" was
planner to center on the voting on Amendment 14; in this
year's election, the Amendm~nts were not co~pl~tely tabulated until November 23 , which delayed publication.
A COLOR SLIDE presentation of Atlanta Rapid Transit is being developed, and is alm<?st completed. In addit\on
to slides on Atlanta's plans, the pictures mclude work bemg
done in Toronto, Cleveland, and scene from the San Francisco System now under construction . For further information , call MARTA, 524-5711.
SOME VERY PROMINENT Georgians endorsed the
passage of Amendment 14 ; Gov. Carl Sanders_, former qov.
Ernest Vandiver, Lt. Gov.-elect George T . Smith, and Highway Director James L. Gillis, Sr., and Congressman James
A. Mackay all strongly urged its approval.
RA.PIO TRA.NSIT
-'
PROGRESS
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT A UTHORITY
BOB G L E NN B L DG . · 1 20 MARIETTA ST .. N.W .
P H O N E 5 24- 5 711 ( AREA C ODE 4 04 )
NOV E M B ER
~1
19 6 6
°
VOL .
1,
NO .
2
•
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303
�R.APID TR.ANSIT
PROGRESS
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
JrA~
m A
~.J....ci.
" "1\
.J..V.J..
REPORTS TO THE
PEOPLE IT SERVES ... "
OCTOBER 1966
VOL.
1,
NO .
RAPID TRANSIT CAR
COMES TO METRO ATLANTA
A scale "walk-in" model of a rapid transit car of the
future will be on display in Atlanta during October
and early November. The "New SCOT"-"Steel Car
of Tomorrow"-developed by U. S. Steel Corporation,
will be one of the attractions at the 1966 Southeastern
Fair, opening in Atlanta September 29. The "New
SCOT" is being scheduled for exhibit in several shopping centers in the Metro Area during the succeeding
weeks.
system, would transport them at speeds up to 75 miles
per hour, with schedule speeds, including stops, of 45
MPH.
The car is built of light-weight "sandwich" panels of
steel and stainless steel, developed by U. S. Steel
Corporation engineers. Each panel is made up of a
steel core, resembling the structure inside an egg crate,
sandwiched between sheets of steel bonded to the core
with an epoxy adhesive. In the car design, panels are
used both for structural side framing and floor support.
The "New SCOT" is only one of many rapid transit
cars and prototypes which will be carefully evaluated by
MARTA and its engineers before a specific design is
chosen for the local system. The MARTA-sponsored
exhibit will provide the first opportunity most Georgians
will have to see an example of the equipment which
could be used in the system now being developed for
the 5-county Metropolitan Atlanta area.
The " New SCOT" will be on exhibit in Baltimore,
Md., Sept. 28, and will be shipped directly to Atlanta.
It is expected to be on display at the Southeastern
Fair Oct. 1-8. The display, to be located just inside
Gate 2 at the Fair, will be open at all regular Fair Hours.
Admission is free.
The model car to be seen in Atlanta is a 37-foot
shortened version of a proposed 75-foot rapid transit
car. The full-length car would seat 300 passengers in
air-conditioned comfort, and, if used in t he Atlanta
The exhibit is tentatively scheduled for the following
locations after the Fair closes: Oct. 10-15, Rich's
Downtown; Oct. 17-22, North DeKalb Center; and
Oct. 24-29, Greenbriar.
�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
BOB GLENN BLDG . " 120 MARIETTA ST., N. W .
ATLANTA. GA. 30303 · PHONE 524-5711
"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE 5-COl.JNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA." "
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
RICHARD H. RI CH, Chairnian.
ROY A. BLOU N T, Vice Chairman
ROBERT F. ADAM SON, Treasurer
GLENN E. BENNETT, S ecretary
CITY OF ATLANTA:
L. D. MILTON
MILLS B. LA NE, JR.
RAWSON HAVERTY
RICHARD H. RICH
MEET THE MARTA STAFF
HENRY L. STUART became General Manager,
MARTA, on June I, 1966. His responsibility is the
overall development of the Rapid Transit System, from
engineering, to design, through construction, to operation. Stuart, operating under policies established by
the IO-member Board of Directors
of MARTA, acts as co-ordinator
between the Board and the consulting engineering firm planning
the system; various federal, state,
and local governmental agencies;
manufacturers and suppliers of
equipment, and citizens interested
in rapid transit. Stuart is the chief
administrative officer.
CLAYTON COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
DR. SA NFORD ATWOOD
ROY A. BLOUNT
FULTON COUNTY:
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
W. A . PULVER
GWINNETT COUNTY:
K. A. MCMILLO N
COBB COUNTY (Obser ver )
OTIS A . BRUMBY, JR .
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L. STUART, General Manager
KING ELLIOTT, Director of Public Information
H . N . JOH NSON, S ecr etary to General Manager
ATLANTA NEEDS RAPID TRANSIT ... NOW!
"Early completion of the Rapid Transit System is
the only hope for relieving the traffic problems which
plague Atlanta," according to Richard H. Rich, Chairman of MARTA. Rich pointed out that one of the most
important things in the economic
development of any area is the
ability to move people and things
effectively and quickly; and, therefore, the primary purpose of a
rapid transit system is to get
people to and from their jobs
quickly, easily, and comfortably.
"Rapid Transit will not solve all
of the traffic congestion," Rich emphasized. "but it will go a long
Richard H. Rich
way toward the solution.'.'
Rich noted that State Highway Department figures
show that, on a 24-hour-a-day basis, the North Freeway
between 14th Street and downtown is already operating at 35% above its rated capacity. By 1975, the
Highway Department estimates that this same section
will have 70 % to 88% more people wanting to use it
than it is designed for. By 1975 all Atlanta expressways will have more people wanting to use them than
the expressways are designed to handle.
"By completing our planned Rapid Transit System,
we can remove tens of thousands of commuter cars
from the expressways, and make it easier for those who
have to drive to reach their destinations; by doing this,
not only will Atlanta continue 'on the move', but traffic
itself will be able to 'move'," Rich concluded.
Henry L. Stuart
Prior to assuming his post with
MARTA. Stuart was Director of
Service Control, Southern Railway System, Atlanta.
He is a licensed Interstate Commerce Commission
Practitioner, a Certified Member of the American
Society of Traffic and Transportation. He is married,
with three children, and resides at 3282 David Road in
DeKalb County.
KING ELLIOTT assumed his post as Public Information Director, MARTA, on August 22, 1966. He is
responsible for the development and implementation
of a complete public information
and education program. He edits
MARTA's "Rapid Transit PROGRESS," and works closely with
news and other media. He will
also be responsible for developing
other means of telling the Rapid
Transit story, thru displays, public meetings, speeches, trade shows,
etc.
Elliott was News Director, WSB
Radio, before assuming his present
position. While at WSB, he received numerous station and individual awards for excellence in news programming. He is a member of
Sigma Delta Chi, national professional journalism
society.
King Elliott
He resides with his wife and four children at 811
Brookridge Dr. N. E., Atlanta.
H. N. "JOHNNY" JOHNSON, secretary to the
General Manager, came to MARTA June 13, 1966,
from the Lockheed-Georgia Com- - - - - - - - pany, where he held a position in
the employment office. Johnson
handles much of the administrative work of the office, in addition
to his other duties.
H. N. Johnson
He was for three years Administrative Assistant to James V.
Carmichael, Chairman of the
Board, Scripto, Inc.; and for seventeen years was Executive Secretary to the Vice President of
the Central of Georgia Railway.
Johnson, who resides at 1004
Williams Mill Rd. N. E. . has a
son and daughter who attend Decatur High School.
�METROPOLITAN
ATLANTA
"Where We've Been ..."
1954-Metropolitan Planning Commission notes need
for rapid transit "within a few years"
1959-MPC begins series of transportation policy
studies
1960-MPC develops exploratory investigation of rapid
transit as possible supplement to freeway network
1961-Expanded 5-county Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission proposes comprehensive 5-county R-T plan
- Atlanta Transit System {privately-owned bus
company) endorses idea of publicly-owned rapid
t ransit system in own preliminary proposal,
"Rapid Atlanta"
-Atlanta Chamber of Commerce studies and endorses R-T
1962-General Assembly creates " Metropolitan Atlanta
T ransit Study Commission" ; MATSC lets cont ract to Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas to develop final plan; PBQD work, completed
December 1962, is approved as "official" plan
- Constitutional amendment to make rapid transit a legitimate public function passes in Fulton
and DeKalb counties, but fails statewide
1963- "Committee of 100" is formed, with former Governor Ernest Vandiver as Chairman
- General Assembly creates " Georgia State Study
Commission" to st udy problems from state's
viewpoint
1964- Rapid Transit Amendment (affecting only 5
counties in Metro Atlanta area) passes
1965- General Assembly passes " Metropolitan Atlanta
Rapid Transit Authority Act of 1965," providing for an Interim Study Commission ; six eligible governments hold speci a l elect ion on
whether to participate; only Cobb County votes
not-to take part
RAPID
TRANSIT
HIGH L I G HTS
" ... and Where We Are ... "
January 3, 1966-Interim Study Commission becomes
"Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority"
-Budget of $300,000 for 1966 is approved ($175,000 local funds, $125,000 federal funds); also,
Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission has $122,000 federal grant for rapid transit
planning
June I-Henry L. Stuart becomes MARTA General
Manager
June 13-H. N. Johnson becomes Secretary to General
Manager
June 28-Contract is let to Parsons, Brinckerhoff,
Tudor and Bechtel to up-date 1962 plan, and for
preliminary planning on North-South line (Oglethorpe to Hapeville)
•
July-Cobb County Chamber of Commerce appoints
special committee to study question of another
referendum
August 22-King Elliott becomes Public Information
Director
Sept. 13-Otis Brumby, Jr. of Marietta is appointed
official "observer" for Cobb County at MARTA
meetings
Sept.-Work begins on application for $500,000 in federal funds for preliminary engineering on EastWest line
" ... and Where We're Going ... "
Nov. 8-Constitutional Amendment to allow state to
participate in cost of mass transit to be voted
on
1967-up-dating of 1962 study to be complete
1968-Referendum to finance system to go to voters
1972-North-South Line complete, begins operation
1975-East-West line (Avondale Estates-Adamsville)
opens
1980-Entire System complete
HOW FAR HOW FAST?
The map at left shows the proposed routes for
the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit System.
The following table shows t ypical distances and
travel t imes from , Stations to Transit Center,
which will be located downtown south of Marietta St ., between Broad and Peachtree Streets.
Station
Distance
Time
Norcross .
18.2 miles 23 minutes
Doraville .
13.6
19
10.4
15
Oglethorpe . .
7.1
11
Lenox Square.
Ansley Park
3.4
6
Tenth .St reet
2.0
4
Forest Park .
12.9
16
Hapeville .
9.9
13
East Point .
6.4
9
West End . .
2.2
2
Avondale Estates
7.4
11
Decatur. . . .
6.1
9
Moreland Avenue
2.8
4
4.5
8
Hightower Road.
Ashby Street .
1.6
3
Marietta .
18.3
25
Smyrna . . .
12.9
18
7.2
12
Moores Mill Road
8
Cooks . . . . .
4.7
North Druid Hills Rd. 10.3
15
�l
I
j
ENGINEERS REVISE 1962 PLAN
Engineers for Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel,
MARTA engineering consultants, are in their new offices in Atlanta, revising the 1962 Rapid Transit Plan.
The staff of seven is headed by John Coil, Resident
Manager; Raymond K. O'Neil, Deputy Resident Manager ; and Raymond W. Gustafson, Supervising Engineer. Coil says major emphasis is being given to the
railroad "gulch" area, where the Transit Center is to
be located. Engineers are also working on confirmation
of route locations downtown and in outlying areas.
Patronage studies are continuing, along with studies of
downtown distribution of passengers. This part of the
work is about 20 percent completed.
A library study of soils factors is also underway, and
is estimated to be 50 percent completed.
The revision of plans for the North-South line is expected to be completed in June, 1967; and the target
date for revision of the East-West line is December,
1967.
RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT on transportation of passengers goes tQ Georgia Voters in Nov. 8 General Election. The proposed amendment would declare
public transportation of passengers to be "an essential
governmental function," and would allow the state to
allocate funds to public transportation authorities. The
state is limited to "not more than 10 per cent" of the
total cost, either directly or indirectly. A simple ·maJority of those voting on the amendment will be required
for passage.
COBB COUNTY COMMISSION appointed an official
"observer" to attend MARTA meetings and report on
its actions. The Commission September 13 named Otis
_A. Brumby, Jr., Assistant to the Publisher of the Marietta Daily Journal, to the post.
HENRY L. STUART, General Manager of MARTA,
has been telling the Rapid Transit story; recent appearances include those to Atlanta Chapter of the Public
Relations Society of America; Atlanta Chapter American Right of Wav Association; Atlanta Chamber of
Commerce Rapid Transit Committee, and Dunwoody
Lions' Club. Coming up are speeches to the Atlanta
Chapter, Georgia Society of Professional Engineers,
and to the Druid Hills Kiwanis Club.
STATE PROPERTIES CONTROL COMMISSION
heard from MARTA representatives on August 23 relating to new lease for state-owned Western and Atlantic Railroad properties. SPCC, L. & N. and Southern
Railways agreed to work out details in lease which
would allow subway. aerial, and station construction in
downtown railroad "gulch" area.
"RAPID TRANSIT PROGRESS" is name given to
MARTA's newsletter, with this issue being the first one.
"RTP" is expected to be published monthly, with King
Elliott as editor, and will be sent free to those requesting it .
. MARTA ACTION
Engineer D ave McB rayer (left) discusses changes with
John Coil, Ray O'Neil, and Assistant D ra ftsm a n L evem e
Pa rks
~,•
In the September 6 meeting, the Board of Directors
approved the selection of "Arthur Andersen and Company" as auditor for the Authority. Action on appointment of fiscal agent was postponed until the October
meeting. ,
RA.l?ID TRA.NSIT
PROGRESS
M E TROPO LITA N ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
BOB GL E NN B LDG. · 120 MARI ET TA ST .• N.W .
PHONE 5 2 4-5711 (AR E A C O D E 4 0 4)
OCTOBER 1966 ·VOL. 1. N0 . 1
·
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
�RA.PID TRA.NSIT
FI<..O
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
"~AR.TA
REPORTS TO THE PEOPLE IT SERVES ... "
FEBRUARY, 1967
VOL.
2 , NO.
2
HOUSE APPROVES FIRST
STATE MONEY FOR MARTA
The first state financial aid for rapid transit was approved
by the House of Representatives Monday, Feb. 20, as the
House passed and sent to the Senate the Appropriations
bill for 1968-69. The Appropriations Bill allocates to
MARTA $250,000 during each year of the biennium (Fiscal 1968, 69) , or a total of $500,000. The state grant,
when finally approved, will be used as "matching funds"
for $2 million in federal funds. The two grants will enable
MARTA to begin some detail design and acquisition of some
right-of-way necessary to preserve the route alignments.
The state funds were included in the budget prepared
by then-Governor Carl Sanders, and in the official budget
submitted by Gov. Lester Maddox. A Constitutional amendment approved in the 1968 General Election allows the
state to pay up to "10 percent of the total cost" of the rapid
transit system.
The House Appropriations Committee, with Rep. James
H . "Sloppy" Floyd as chairman, conducted hearings for
three weeks on the budget requests, with MARTA representatives appearing Feb. 8. Representing the Metropolitan
Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority were Henry L. Stuart, General Manager; John Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel; Stell Huie, MARTA Counsel; Glenn
Bennett, Secretary of the MARTA Board and Executive
Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission; and King Elliott, MARTA Public Information
Director.
Stuart discussed the creation of MARTA, the early and
current work done on rapid transit, and the revision of the
1962 plan which is now under way. Stuart noted that local
financial support has been excellent, and that all requests
made for federal funds thus far have been approved.
"Through 1967 we will have spent or committed $1.5
million to the project," he added, "and with federal funds
committed, state aid for the first time, and the federal funds
we anticipate getting, the total funded project will be about
$5 million." "This will bring us right up to the detail design
stage, and to a time of decision on the proper methods of
financing the construction of the system," Stuart said.
John Coil, PBTB, outlined current work under way in
preliminary engineering, soil-tests, revision of the 1962
plan, and in other areas of work.
Following the presentations of Stuart and Coil, members
of the committee asked a number of questions; the more
pertinent questions and the MARTA answers are found
on page 2 and 3.
R ep. Jam es H. "Sloppy" Floyd, Chairman, presides over meeting
of H ouse A ppropriations Com m ittee (center back), with Vice Chairman Colquitt H. Odom at his left , and Secretary W illiam J. W iggins ;
man in foreground is R ep. Jones Lane, a m ember of the com m ittee.
Legislators listen carefu lly as answers are given to questions put
to those appearing before the H ouse A ppropriations Committee.
�METROP OLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
808 GLENN BLDG . ' 120 MARIETTA ST . , N.W .
ATLAN T A , GA . 30303 · PHONE 524-571 t
"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE 5 -COUNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA.""
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS :
RICHARD H. RICH, Chairman
ROY A. BLOUNT, Vice Chairman
ROBERT F. ADAMSON, Treasi,rer
GLENN E. BENNETT, S ecretary
IRT CONVENTION PLANS
Plans for the upcoming Atlanta Convention of the Institute for Rapid Transit are beginning to take shape. The
convention, to be held at the Atlanta Marriott Motor Hotel
May 24-26, will feature full audience participation in special
study sessions, according to George L. DeMent, President
of IRT.
"We are planning another stimulating program that
should be of great interest not only to IRT members, but
also to many other persons concerned with metropolitan
transportation and planning problems of our growing cities
and urban areas," said DeMent, who is Chairman of Chicago Transit Board:
CITY OF ATLANTA:
L. D. M ILTON
MILLS B . LANE, JR.
RAWSON HAVERTY
RICHARD H. RICH
CLAYTON COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
D R. SANFORD ATWOOD
ROY A. BLOUNT
FULTON COUNTY:
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
W. A. PULVER
GWINNETT COUNTY :
K . A . MCMILLON
COBB COUNTY (Observer)
OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR.
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L . STUART, General M anager
KING ELLIOTT, Director of P u blic Informat ion
H . N. JOHNSON, S ecretary to Gen eral Manager
"RAPID TRANSIT MUST
HAVE TOP PRIORITY!"
"The development of a rapid transit system is an absolute 'must,' and it must have a top priority if we are
to solve, effectively and permanently, our transportation
problems," said Mitchell C. Bishop, College Park b~sinessman and F ulton County member of the MARTA Board.
Bishop, a former Director of the Division of Traffic and
Safety of the State Highway Department, stated that
"while we have made valiant efforts to solve our traffic
problems, so far we have only been nibbling at the edges
and making piecemeal attacks on our
dilemma!"
"Looking at the situation from an
engineering standpoint," he continued,
"a completed and operating rapid
transit system is the framework
around which we can build all other
solutions to the problem of efficient
and safe transportation inside this
.
.
great Metropolitan Atlanta area. With
Mitchell C. Bishop rapid transit transporting 250,000 to
300,000 persons, mostly commuters, every working day, our
streets, highways, and expressways will be able to accommodate vehicular traffic and to move that traffic more
efficiently."
"Another interesting effect rapid transit will have and
indeed is already having," said Bishop, "is a unifying effect
on all the people of the state. All across the state people
now refer to Atlanta as the home of 'our Braves' and 'our
Falcons' ; and they take great pride in the fact that these
teams belong to all Georgians. I n a similar way, rapid
transit will serve not only the people in its immediate area,
but will benefit all Georgia because of the improvement in
ease of transportation and speed and economy of travel
into and out of our capital city."
"I believe rapid transit will have a tremendous effect
on all of Georgia as well as this area," Bishop concluded.
George L. DeMent
David Q . Gaul
"In addition to our IRT members, we wish to extend
an early invitation to all persons working in the related fields
of metropolitan planning, transportation, and government
to join us in Atlanta for three days of challenging workshopstudy sessions," said DeMent.
"Nationally prominent experts in the urban transportation
fi~ld will present case studies which workshop participants
will analyze. The findings by the participants then will be
reviewed in critiques."
David Q. Gaul, Executive Secretary of the IRT, says
that "plans for the system proposed for Metropolitan Atlanta will also be discussed at the convention, which will
highlight the tremendous resurgence of interest in and development of rapid transit in this country and Canada."
LEGISLATORS'
(Members of the House Appropriations Committee had a number of questions for MARTA representatives on how State aid
would be used; the following are typical questions and answers
from the meeting.)
JAMES H. "SLOPPY" FLOYD, Chairman, House Appropriations
Committee: What do you estimate the total cost of the rapid
transit system ?
HENRY L. STUART, MARTA General Manager : The rapid
transit system that we envision to be operational in the middle
of the 1980's will cost in the neighborhood of 450 million dollars.
By the middle of 1970's we will have an operational system incomplete, and it will have cost approximately }50 million dollars.
As Mr. Coil mentioned, these estimates are now in preparation
in this order of magnitude.
FLOYD: L et m e ask you this. D o the citizens in this area have
to vote on som e bonds?
STUART: If a tax levy is required that will raise the property
taxes, referenda must be held.
FLOYD : What if the citizens of this area defeat the bond? H ow
will the State get their money back?
STUART: Such of the money as has been spent for design purposes will not be recoverable; such of it as is in real estate will be
recoverable depending upon the value of the property.
FLOYD: W hat rate of interest do you think you will have to
pay on 450 million?
STUART: Our financial advisors are basing their plans on 4 and
�SNOW JAMS TRAFFIC-RAPID TRANSIT RUNS
On January 26 and 27, more than 23 inches of snow fell in
Chicago, clogging the streets and freeways with stalled vehicles.
Estimates vary, but the consensus is that more than 15,000 cars
and trucks and 600 busses were stuck. While the street traffic
was stalled, the rapid transit lines and commuter railroads kept
running. "From all reports, the only reliable way of getting around
the city was the elevated-subway system," Associated Press
reported.
An editorial in "RAILWAY AGE" noted, "When nothing else
could move in Chicago, the railroads and the Chicago Transit
Authority rapid-transit lines moved. If ever there was evidence
of rail-transit's ability to combat overwhelming obstacles, if ever
there was proof of the railroads' ability to do the job and damn
the odds, Chicago was it. . .. All the CTA rapid-transit lines did
was to provide in-city residents with dependable transportation
while the freeways froze and hundreds of busses and thousands of
cars wallowed around and foundered . . .. To thousands upon
thousands of grateful people, it was enough."
Snowfalls in the Metropolitan Atlanta area are usually no more
than two or three inches, but street traffic usually becomes virtually
impossible. The advent of rapid transit will make travel possible
even in ice and snow conditions.
QUESTIONS AND MAR-TA'S ANSWERS ...
a quarter percent.
FLOYD: Over a period of how many years?
STUART: 30 Years tax free municipals.
FLOYD : So after paying principal and interest you would pay
about 900 million dollars?
STUART: Yes sir, based on a $450 million bond issue.
FLOYD : Now who is going to actually own this rapid transit
system?
STUART: The MARTA Act of 1965 provides that the title to
the real estate and the rolling stock is vested in the Transit Authority which is an arm of the State.
FLOYD: There's a rumor going around that when this thing is
built the bus line might end up owning all this. ls that true?
STUART: I cannot see that at all. There is no provision in the
Act for that and there is no plan for it.
WILSON B. WILKES, State Budget Officer: I just wanted to ask
Mr. Stuart about $250,000 each year that you requested or that's
been recommended for mass rapid transit. Do you plan to use this
and go ahead and start buying right of way?
STUART: Certain necessary right of way that is necessary to protect our alignments.
WILKES: The building of a transit system itself is going to require
additional tax levy, and that additional tax levy is going to require
a bond election?
STUART: Yes sir.
WILKES: So actually you will acquire property before you do
the other.
STUART: Yes sir.
RODNEY M. COOK, Member, House·Appropriations Committee:
Will you explain to the Committee why you f eel it is necessary to
purchase some of these parcels of land now?
STUART: Yes, for example in Sunday's paper there was an announcement that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers have put together a p arcel of land near the stadium for a new
office building. T his office building is squarel y astride a piece of
property we were studying as a possible route to the South and
is going to cause us untold expense to re-engineer that South
route. We must have a way to stop this, and the best way is to put
up or shut up.
COOK: ls not also one of the reasons you had to re-engineer
because of the Life of Georgia was built on one of your routes?
STUART: Yes, the Life of Georgia Building at North Avenue and
West Peachtree is an example of the same thing again.
(In answer to a question from a reporter later, Stuart amplified
his comments on the total cost figure of "$900 million including
principal and interest" as used during the committee hearing. )
STUART: One possibility on financing breaks down this way:
if we get the maximum federal funds of 60%, and the maximum
state funds of 10%, this is 70% of the total construction cost.
This would leave 30%, or only about $ 110 million on which interest might be paid. These proportions are possible under existing state and federal legislation.
�Members of th e legislative delegations from MARTA counties breakfast with m embers of the MART A Board of Directors and staff at
Marriott Jan. 24. Some 17 members of the House and 7 m embers of
the Senate heard MA RTA officials discuss plans and progress in the
development of the rapid transit system proposed for M etropolitan
Atlanta. In the picture, Henry L. Stuart, MART A General Manager,
is responding to a question from a legislator. Board Chairman Richard H. Rich presided at the breakfast m eeting.
MARTA ACTION : At the February meeting, the
'Board of Directors ratified the contracts sigiied by
Henry L. Stuart Feb. 2; one contract defined the scope
of the work to be done with the $369,333 grant from
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; the other contract authorized PBTB engineers
to start the work immediately.
Jeff Wingfield, Planning Director, Atlanta Region
Metropolitan Planning Commission, outlined the need
for strong overall plans for downtown Atlanta, and
the part rapid transit cou ld play in implementing such
a plan.
Henry L. Stuart, MART A General Manager (left), and Congressman Fletcher Thompson, U. S. Representative from Georgia's Fifth
District, discuss some of the proposed rapid tramit lines currently
under study by engineering consultants. Rep. Thompson, visiting in
MARTA offices Feb. 10, said that the U. S. agencies in Washington
he has talked to appear to have a high regard for the work being
done by the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority.
Collier B. Gladin, City of Atlanta Planning Director,
discussed progress in the Community Improvement
Plan project and work being done to set up a Model
Cities Program. Referring to the impact rapid transit
will have, he urged continued close coordination of
plans and efforts to achieve orderly development of
the great potential of Atlanta.
The next meeting of the MARTA Board of Directors will be Tuesday, March 7, 3:30 p.m., in Conference Room 619, the Glenn Building, 120 Marietta
St. , N . W.
_~.,./
~'-.
/
·...""-...
Hon. lvijn Allen, Jr,, M~yor
City of Atl~rnt~
City Hall
Atlant~, g~. JOJOl
~
I
�"~AR.TA
REPORTS TO THE
PEOPLE IT SERVES . . . "
FIRST
ANNUAL REPORT
1966
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
�HE CITIZENS •
?1t(Jffl 7 ~, ,,
• •
?'UH# 7~,,,
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
The progress made in the first year of our Authority
has exceeded our most optimistic expectations. The successes a chieved and the public and private acceptance of
the rapid transit project have been most encouraging.
One of the first tasks facing the Authority when it
officially came into being January 3, 1966 was that of obtaining funds to begin the revision of the 1962 plan for
rapid transit and the preliminary engineering on the system itself. The $300,000 financial support pledged by the
pa rticipating governments provided funds to set up offices
and matching funds for application for federal funds. Applica tions were made to and granted by the U . S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds to
finance two programs. These funds were immediately put
to work, a nd the work is under way.
Later in the year another application was made under
the "Section 9" provision of the Mass Transportation Act,
and this also was approved, providing us with $369,000 to
expand a nd continue the work being done.
In December, then-Governor Ca rl Sanders announced
that the State budget would contain a r equest for $500,000
over two years for MARTA. This was made possible by
a constitutional amendment which was approved by 55
per cent of the voters in the State in Nove~ber, and _is
the first financial support from the State m the rapid
transit project.
The nucleus of th e MARTA staff was formed with the
a ppointment of H enry L . Stuart as General M a nager. Mr.
Stuart has begun the work of securing qualified persons to
fill key positions.
The a cceptance of the project by Federal, Sta te, and
Loca l Governments, a nd by the people of the State At
Large, a nd in the M etropolitan Atlanta Area, h as been
most gra tifying a nd inspires u s to increase our effor ts in
1967 for even greater strides toward our ultima~e goal of
providing our citizens the most m odern, efficient , and
economical rapid tra nsit system possible.
RICHARD H. RICH,
Chairman
GENERAL MANAGER
On June 28, 1966 we signed a contract with the consulting engineers, Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel for
preliminary engineering work on the North-South Line
between Oglethorpe and the airport. The Atlanta Region
Metropolitan Planning Commission also signed contra cts
with Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel and H ammer ,
Greene, Siler Associates to update the 1962 plan in its
entirety. This committed to the work approximately 310
thousand dollars of which $62,500 was local funds.
The financial r eport on page 3 and the charts on page
4 indicate the income and expenditures of the Authority
during 1966. These figures include the non-recurring expenditures required to establish the offices for the staff, a nd
the funds committed but not expended as "m a tching funds"
for programs financed in part with federal funds.
The preliminary engineering a nd updated planning
will result in definition of routes, operating expenses, fa re
structures, and service requirements in the light of ch an ges
that have occurred in M etropolitan Atlanta since 1962.
This work will place your Authority in a position to proceed with detail design and right of wa y acquisition.
In the closing days of the 89th Congress the p assage
of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1966 was one
of the m ost encouraging events of the yea r . It m eans that
our work will continue without interruption .
This very com plex job of developin g th e best rapid
t ransit system in the wo rld requires ca reful plannin g an d
engineering, which , in th e early stages, is very time consuming. W ork is m oving a head as rapidly as possible, considering the requirements for attention to detail and highquality planning a nd engineering, and the yea r 1967 should
see som e m ajor achievem ents in the engineering efforts .
HEN RY L. STUART,
General Manager
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
B OB G LEN N BLD G . · t 20 MARIETT A S T . , N . W .
A TL A NTA , GA . 303 03 · PH O N E 524- 5 711
.. DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE S-COUNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA. "
Edi ted by KI NG E LLIOTT
.•,
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
R ICHARD
R OBERT F.
OFFI CERS :
Chairman
R OY A. BLOU N T, V ic e Chair111.an
A DAMSON , T r easurer
GL ENN E. BE NNETT, S ecr etary
H.
R ICH,
CITY O F ATL ANTA :
L. D . MfLTON
MILLS B. L ANE, J R.
RAWSON HAVERTY
RICHARD H . R ICH
CLAYTON COUNTY:
E DGAR BLALOCK
D EKALB COU N TY :
R oy A . BLOUNT
D R. S ANFORD ATWOOD
w.
FULTON COUNT Y:
A . P ULVER
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
GW I NNETT COUNTY :
K. A. M CMILLO N
COBB COUNTY ( O bser ver)
OTIS A. BRUM BY, JR
MARTA STAFF:
H ENRY L. STUART, Gen eral Manag er
K I NG E L LIOTT, Director of Public Informa tion
H . N . J OHNSON, S ecretary to Gen er al Manag er
Richard J-l . R ich , Chairm an (right-center, with pipe) presides oi·er
m eetings o f the M A RT A Board of D irectors. T he Board m eetings are
held th e first T uesday of each month , and are open to the public.
T he Second International Conference on Urban Transportation will
be held in Pittsburgh, Pa., April 17-19, 1967. T heme fo r the Confere nce will be "The Urban Push : Cities in Motion ."
" If an urban rapid transit system never earned an operati~g profi t,
it would sti ll pay fo r itself a thousand times over through its beneficial impact on real estate values and increased assessment." G. Warren Heenan , Past President of the Toro nto (O ntario) R eal Estate
Board .
�STATEMENT OF
CASH RECEIPT
AN
SBU
MENT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1966
Cash R eceipts From:
AnTH U R
A....... OEn sr: N & Co.
/\T....,.-Y,o. ,Q r..oMO l,O.
Local Governments
Other
$290,895.00
429.48
To the Boa rd o r Dt r ec t or a o r
TOTAL
$291,324.48
Hetropolttan At.ll nu l!apt d
TTa n11Jt Autho r ity :
lie have 11 z u:1!ned the ata t 111111nt or caah r acetp t i: and
d t ,bur 1111::111nt1 o r the ?-let r o p o l1tan Atlanta Rapid Tr 11nalt Autho r ity (,
Cash Disbursements For:
Ceo r11ta ciuntctpal co r po r ation) ro r the 1aa r ended Decaabu· Jl , 1966 .
Ou r 11 111:i l na tt on 11a11 made in acco r dancet 111th 111n11 r al l 7 a ccepted
Planning and E ngineering (Note 1)
72,848.09
Administrative & General
96,072.07
Unexpended Funds
$122,404.32
TOTAL
$291,324.48
audlttn1 ounda r d, , and accordtna l y inc l uded •uch te•U or th•
•ccount1n1 r ecord11 and 11uch o t her audh1n1 p r o c edu r e• aa '-'e conaldercd
nece1e, r1 1n the c!reu:1Unce1 .
In ou r opinion , t he aee:0111panyln1 a tateaa nt preHnt• ra! r ly
the c1111h r eceipt• end dt11bur11e:.,.ent11
or
the Hetropoltun At lanta Rapid
Tr ana!t Authority !'o r the yea r ended Decembe r )1 , 1966.
Atlanta , Geor11a ,
January 12 , 1967 .
1. The Authority has a contract with the Atla nta R egion
M etropolitan Planning Commission to u pda te th e 1962
plan and program of rapid transit for the Atlanta
m etropolitan region. The Authority is committed to
pay $61,188 for this work of which $31,250 has been
paid as of December 31, 1966. The remainder of the
funds required by the P lanning Commission for this
project (approximately $122,000) will be provided by
the United States Government under Section 701 of
the Housing Act of 1954. The Commission also has (1)
a contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel to
provide the engineering services required to upda te the
1962 plan, and (2) a cont ract with Hammer, Greene,
Siler Associates, Inc. to update the financial and organization considerations of the 1962 plan.
The Authority has a contract with th e same engineers
to provide extended work and engineering support in
addition to that provided under the Commission contract. The engineers are to be paid cost plus a fee for
each project under the contract (total cost not to exceed $100,000) .
2. The Authority has a commitment from the Department
of Housing a nd Urban Development of the United States
Government to advance $125,000 to it t o be used for
preliminary planning a nd engineering for t he construction of the initial operations of the rapid transit system.
The advance is noninterest bearing and repayable only
upon the start of construction of the system. The Authority h as entered into a contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel to perform this work.
Drawings of rapid transit cars now in use or on order by
existing rapid transit systems. M ARTA engineers will examine all types of rapid transit cars before final design is
determined.
�WHERE THE MONEY
CAME FROM
AND WENT
IN
1966
Gwinnett
3.1%
• Docs not include
F ederal Funds fo r ARMPC's
Transit Project
/Ind ue 1967 We ShJedd See,,,
INCOME
EXPENDITURES
U. S. Department
of
Housing and Urban
Development
"
..c:
6
54.8%
Administration
16.9%
"The reason for building the system itself gives rise to a comprehensive set of environmental design requirements that need most
serious consideration. Though the system is a utility, in the sense
that it is a useful necessity, it isn't like water, or light or heat, or
even telephones, in that everybody needs some for his own use.
It's equally a necessity to those who don't use it. Those, for instance, who drive on less crowded roads and find parking spots
easier as a result of it. So that there is no one who is not affected
by the existence of the system, whether he rides on it or just looks
BAY AREA
RAPID TRANSIT
as seen by:
Sprague Thresher, Staff Architect,
Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel.
~l
at it, or never even heard of it-if that's possible ... If there can
be more to it than just fast, safe transportation and if it can contribute to the life and the growth of the community and if it can
enrich the rider a little bit, then truly it will be a design for people
and this is really what is happening."
�RAPID TRANSIT
PROGRESS
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
" .LV.L
"'I\ /f"A""C:)rT'1
A
~.L..&:L
REPORTS TO THE PEOPLE IT SERVES.. .
APRIL
I 9 6 7
VOL.11,N0.4
A TALE OF TWO CITIES:
MONTREAL
SAN FRANCISCO
MART A General Manager Henry L. Stuart recently visited Montreal; the fo llowing story summarizes his comments and observations.
MART A Public Information Director King Elliott visited San
Francisco recently, and reports on progress being made by the Bay
Area Rapid Transit District.
The happy citizens of Canada's largest city boast a brand
new subway that they describe as a work of art. After a
close inspection one is inclined to agree. Lines began to
open last October, and April, 1967, saw the end of the
first phase, although extensions are already actively discussed. Are they happy with it? 350,000 riders a day
stick their 25 ¢ magnetic ticket in an automatic turnstile
at one of 26 stations to go for a ride on some part of the
sixteen mile system. Considering Montreal's 2.3 million
population they are heavy users. T hey are proud of their
new subway, too.
Sleek, blue, 9-car trains, set off with a white stripe and
picture windows, run swiftly and quietly (up to 50 miles
· per hour) between bright, airy and colorful stations. They
are rubber tired trains, propelled by electricity, running on
concrete ribbons . T he result is a quiet, smooth r ide, with
a high rate of acceleration that gets the train up to cruising
speed very quickly.
The fourteen station architects went all out to get away
from dungeon-like atmosphere of conventional subways.
Plenty of indirect lighting, mezzanines overlooking the
tracks, and the artful use of color and ceramics did the
trick!
Montreal got its subway by simple determfoation. They
made up their minds that rapid transit in subway was the
answer to their problem, and then the Montrealers proceeded to act on their convictions. In this way rapid transit
came to reality in Montreal in the incredibly short span of
less than five years. There had been talk for 50 years, but
Jean Drapeau, in his mayoralty campaign of 1960 offered
to put a stop to the talk. H e told the voters that if they
"In two-and-a-half years, we will be riding on the world's
most modern rapid transit system, right here in the Bay
Area." This prediction is made confidently by B. R. Stokes,
General Manager of the Bay Area Rapid Transit District
(San Francisco, Alameda (Oakland), and Contra Costa
Counties).
Stokes says that nearly half of the 75-mile, $1 billion,
system is already under construction. Construction Contracts totalling $330 million have been awarded, and work
is under way on 38-route-miles of the system. Included
in these figures are 5 miles of subway, twin tunnels thru
the Berkeley Hills, and the Trans-Bay Tube, "the engineering marvel of the century."
An additional $150-200· million in contracts is expected
to be let by the end of this year .
Two construction projects are complete: tbe 4¼ mile
Diablo Test Track and a 1-mile aerial section in Albany.
In many parts of the Bay Area, construction projects are
under way, and the beginnings of rapid transit are being
observed daily by local residents and commuters.
In several sections of downtown San Francisco, crews
are at work relocating the underground utility lines and
equipment. In most of these areas, one lane of the street
is closed to traffic, but other lanes are still in use. Work
continues on the building of the 57 tube sections which will
be required for the 4 ½ mile tube underneath the Bay between San Francisco and Oakland. The steel shells are
built at the Bethleh em Ship Yard , and are floated to a
nearby pier for outfitting. The first of the sections are in
place in the mud at the bottom of the Bay, and the schedule
calls for another section to be completed every two weeks.
(Continued on Page 2)
(Continued on Page 3)
I
I
I
Monttealers make heavy use of th eir new subway. This picture,
taken at JEAN TALON shows passengers crossing the platform
from train to exit. Bi-lingual signs are universal in Mon·treal.
Temporary decking over subway construction.
�M NTREAL ...
(Continued from Page I, Column I)
would vote for him he would build them a fine new: subway.
They did, and he did.
Mayor Drapeau junked 50-year-old plans and turned to
the Paris Metro for the basic engineering and design criteria.
Indeed, officials from the Paris Metro came to Montreal
to guide the work. In 1961 the City Council authorized
the first of $213 million of general revenue bonds, and
Mayor Drapeau told. his Montreal Public Works Department to get busy.
Digging began in 1962 and the Montrealers rode to
town in 1966! They blasted 70 percent of the tunnels
out of solid rock, and after being lined with concrete it was
23 feet wide and 16 feet high. Their tunnels range from
20 feet deep to 90 feet deep in the earth. Hundreds of
speedy escalators solve the problems of getting out of the
stations. MARTA General Manager, Hank Stuart, who
attended a Rail Committee Meeting of the American Transit Association in Montreal recently reported, "The speed
of the engineering and construction of this system is more
than remarkable, but it fades into the background when
you open your eyes and take in the beauty of a system
that was clearly designed to give its customers a treat. I am
impressed. It looks good, it runs smoothly, and it's there."
An up-to-date signal and power distribution system provide a safe, dependable operation which is a must for modern, high speed and safe transportation. Two men operate
each train riding on opposite ends, taking turns running
the equipment.
A total of 369 of the rubber-tired rapid transit cars have
been purchased at an average cost of $123,000. The Metro
operates 9-car trains at all times, \Vith 2½ minute headways
foring rush hours, and 5 minute headways at other times.
The maximum capacity of each line in each direction past
a given point is estimated at 57,600 passengers per hour.
This is based on ·160 p,assengers per car and nine-car trains
at the rate of 40 trains per hour.
Line No. I, running 4.3 miles east and west, and Line No.
2, running 8.6 miles north and south, were opened for passengers October 14, 1966. On the first week-end of service,
over one and one-half million passengers rode the system.
Line No. 4 connects with Expo 67, the 1967 World Exhibition commemorating Canada's centennial as an independent
nation. Plans for the missing Line No. 3 have been suspended indefinitely.
Did the Montrealers appreciate what was done for them?
They re-elected Mayor Drapeau by a whopping majority,
and gave his party 45 of the 48 seats on the city governing
body.
T he examp le of M elro Station architecture at Sh erbroo ke illustra tes
th e beautiful use . o f light an d ceramics to provide a feeling o f
spacious cheerfulness. (This picture was ta ken before passengers
were being accepted).
The M ezzanin e concourse at JARRY is anoth er example of how
light and spaciousness get one away from th e o ld-fashioned "gopherhole" subway station.
This -view of CR EMAZIE looking do wn from an open m ez zanin e
co n veys the feeling of fr ee and uncramped m o vem ent.
T unn els 0 11 the Metro are ligh ted all th e ll'ay for safety an d com fort.
Note th e signal (upper right) that provides the train operator ll'ith
in dications abollt the track ahead.
�SAN FRANCISCO ...
(Continued from Page I, Column 2)
Subway construction in Oakland; steel form for subway shell in
place on right.
A /most- comp/et~d construction on translfl on section of subway;
constmction goes from cut-and-cover subway to ground level track.
Co111p /e1ed section of aerial structure, with landscaped "lin ear
park" beneath.
The major part of the construction work actually underway now is across the Bay in the Oakland Area. In addition to the Test Track and the completed aerial section in
Albany, other projects are in varying stages of completion in
downtown Oakland. One section of the cut-and-cover subway is virtually completed, with only the rails and other
equipment to be installed. Excavation work is in progress
in several of the streets, including Broadway, one of the
principal downtown thoroughfares . In order to maintain
as efficient a flow of traffic as possible, the tunnels are
" boarded over" and traffic is permitted above while work
continues below. All stages of this type of construction are
visible now. The utilities are first dug up and relocated;
the ditching is accomplished and the vertical beams and retaining walls are installed. Horizontal beams are then put
into place; wooden decking (boards about 12 by 6 inches
bolted together and laid edgewise) is installed; and traffic
is restored.
F arther out, construction has begun on sections of the
Grove-Shafter Freeway, with the BART lines running down
the median. Much of the area has been cleared, and bridges
have been started. BART officials point out that considerable savings will be made by both the Highway Department
and BART because of the economic advantages of joint
planning and development of the freeway-rapid transit complex. Some 15 miles of the BART lines will occupy joint
right of way with the freeway.
In other areas, crews "holed thru" the second of the
Berkeley H ills Tunnels ; va rious test procedures are in progress at the test track ; and landscaping of aerial structure
continues.
The 75 mile system is being financed with proceeds from
a $792 million bond issue and $ 180 million in state fund s
fro m Bridge tolls. BART is now seeking ways of meeting a
$200 million "over-run", which resul ted from excess ive inflation, construction delays because of litigation , and changes
in original proposals. BART officials are confident that
the necessary funds will be secured, and that trains will run
as scheduled in late 1969.
INSTITUTE FOR RAPID TRANSIT CONVENTION
May 24-26, 1967-Atl anta Marriott Motor Hotel
AMERICAN TRANSIT ASSOCIATION
CONVENTION
Oct. 22-26, 1967, Atlanta Regency-Hyatt H ouse
Full-scale mock-up of car to be used in BART system.
�COUNTIES HONOR MARTA
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority has
received the "Meritorious Award" of the Association
County Commissioners of Georgia for its multiple county
service to Clayton, DeKalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett Counties
and to the City of Atlanta.
Richard H. Rich, MARTA Chairman, accepted the
award at the Annual meeting of the ACCG at Jekyll Island
April 4.
806 GLENN B LDG .• 120 MAR I ETTA S T . , N. W .
A TL ANTA. GA . 30303 • P H ONE 524 - 5711
" DIRECTED BY THE GEORGI A STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE S·COUNT.Y
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA . "
Edited by KING ELLIOTr
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
RICHARD
H.
RICH,
Chairman
ROBERT F. ADAMSON, Treasurer
ROY
A.
BLOUNT,
Vic e Chairnian
GLENN E. BENNETr, S ecr etary
CITY OF ATLANTA:
M ILLS B. LANE, JR.
L . D. M ILTO N
RICHARD H. RICH
RAWSON HAVERTY
CLAYTO N COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
Roy A. BLOUNT
D R. SA NFORD ATWOOD
w.
F ULTON COUNTY:
A. PULVER
M ITCHELL C. BISHOP
GW I NNETT COUNTY:
K. A. MCMILLON
COBB COUNTY (Observer)
OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR .
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L . STUART, Gen eral Manag er
KING ELLIOTT, Direc tor of P1tblic Information
H. N. JOHNSON, S ecretary to General Manager
A CCG President Dr. Bruce Schaefer presents award to MART A
Chairman Richard H. Rich .
MARTA ACTION
In accepting the award, Rich outlined the progress which
has been made through the cooperative efforts of the five
governments in establishing the Authority, securing a basic
staff, and beginning preliminary engineering on the system.
He described the rapid transit project as one in which "four
counties and a city, each with varying and extensive needs
and problems of its own, have united their efforts and resources to solve a problem common to them all ... that of
providing rapid and comfortable transportation for their
citizens."
Rich noted that the State of Georgia has now joined into
partnership with the four counties and the city by appropriating $500,000 for MARTA, and concluded, "With the
continued support of our counties, I am thoroughly convinced that we not only CAN, but WILL, complete this
absolutely and vitally needed rapid transit system."
At the April 4 meeting, the Board of Directors of the
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority instructed
the General Manager to explore the possibility of extending
the West Line to serve the new "Six Flags Over Georgia"
amusement park, and to report his findings at the May
Board meeting.
The observation was made that similar study should be
given to possible future service to the Stone Mountain
Memorial Park.
Chairman Richard H. Rich reported on the presentation
of The Meritorious Award of the Association County Commissioners of Georgia; the ACCG presented the award to
MART A for its multiple county service to the four counties and city composing the Authority.
The next meeting of the Board of Directors is to be held
Tuesday, May 2, 1967 , at 3:30 p.m. in Room 619, the
Glenn Building, 120 Marietta, St. N. W.
-'
U. S. Postage
PROGRESS
Atlanta, Ga.
Permit No. 20
PAID
METROPOLITA N ATL ANTA RAPID TRANSIT A UTHORITY
BOB GLENN BLDG . · 120 MARIETTA ST .. N . W .
PHONE 524-5711 (AREA CODE 404)
APRIL
1 967,
VOL.
II,
NO.
·
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
4
Mr. R. Earl La ~ders
AJmi~. Asst. to the Mayor
206 City Hall
Atla~ta, G~.
~1
BULK RATE
R.A..PID TR.A..NSIT
,o)O~
�RAPID TRANSIT
PROGRESS
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
"MARTA
REPORTS TO THE
PEOPLE IT SERVES . .. "
A U G U ST
VO L. 2,
1967
N o.
8
MARTA DIGS FIRST
HOLE-IN-THE-GROUND
Rapid Tr.µ1sit's first "hole in the ground" was dug in a parking lot at Broad Street-Trinity Avenue in downtown Atlanta Friday morning, August 4, 1967. The liole was the first of a series
of 35 test holes drilled to secure rock and soil samples.
The borings are part of the preliminary engineering now being conducted by the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority through its consulting engineers.
Henry L. Stuart, MARTA General Manager, explained, "This
hole drilled today marks the first time MARTA has initiated its
own research into the basic characteristics of the ground in
which we will put our subway. Soil tests are a very basic part of
the preliminary engineering required before any detailed design
is possible. After all , you can't design the foundation 'til you
know what's down there to put it on."
" Another very important decision to be made," Stuart continued, "is how deep to put the subway under Peachtree Street:
that is, very deep in a tunnel, or shallow in a trench, which
would involve relocation of utilities and digging up Peachtree
Street. These soil tests will provide much of the information we
will need to make this decision."
"Of course, the hole we are really looking forward to drilling
is the one that marks the start of construction," Stuart concluded.
Some 16 of these test borings have since been made on the
Central Line of Rapid Transit along Broad, Peachtree ,. and West
Peachtree Streets; this 5½ mile section of rapid transit will be
subway the entire distance. The holes ranged in depth from 35
to 105 feet.
The soil tests were made by Law Engineering Testing Company of Atlanta, under contract with Parsons BrinckerhoffTudor-Bechtel, engineering consultants for MARTA. Analysis of
the soil and rock samples is underway at this time.
MARTA General Manager Henry L. Stuart (with glasses) watches closely
as drill brings up soil from first test hole.
Samples of soil are carefully put into glass jars which are then labeled and
taken to laboratory for study.
�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA
RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
808 GLENN BLOG .* 120 MARIETTA ST .. N.W .
ATLANTA. GA . 30303 •PHONE 524-5711
"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE S-COUNTY
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA ."
Edited by KING ELLIOTT
-'
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
RICHARD H. RICH, Chairman
ROY A. BLOUNT, Vice Chairman
HERBERT J. DICKS0:-1, Treasurer
GLENN E. BENNETT, Secreta.r y
CITY OF ATLANTA:
ROBERT F . ADAMSON
L. D. MILTON
RICHARD H. RICH
RAWSON HAVERTY
CLAYTON COUNTY:
EDGAR BLALOCK
DEKALB COUNTY:
ROY A. BLOUNT
DR. SANFORD ATWOOD
FULTON COUNTY:
MITCHELL C. BISHOP
W. A . PULVER
GWINNETT COUNTY:
K. A. McMILL8N
COBB COUNTY (Observer)
OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR.
MARTA STAFF:
HENRY L. STUART, General Manager
EARL W. NELSON, Chief Engineer
KING ELLIOTT, Director of Public Information
H. N . JOHNSON, Secretary to General Manag_cr
RICH URGES
CUTS RESTORED
MA~TA Chairman, ~chard H. Rich, has formally urged the
restoration of cuts made in the U.S. House of Representatives in
the budget request of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Rich made his request in a statement to Senator
Warre~ G. Magnuson, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Independent Offices, July 27, 1967.
Rich referred to the Metropolitan Development Incentive
Grants under Section 205 of Title II of the Demonstration
Cities_ ~d Metropolitan Development Act of 1966, and to app_ropnat!fns for the urban transportation programs, and continued, I am urging you to approve the full HUD requests and
to restore cuts made in the House of Representatives. We support strongly the $30 million requested by HUD for the Metropolitan Development Incentive Grants and the $230 million advance funding requested by HUD for the transportation program."
We are certainly ready to take advantage of Section 205 of
the Metropolita~ Development Act of 1966," he said. "Funding
of the Metropolitan Development Act incentive program can do
much to encourage our local governments when it comes to im~lementing area-~ide comprehensive planning for transportation, water pollut10n control, open space land for recreation,
and ~he othe_r public programs having regional significance."
Rich outlmed progress made in the development of rapid
~fan~it plans here with the use of local, state and federal funds.
It 1s therefore clear that the availability of federal funds for
tran~it in ~h_e last three years has made it financially feasible for
public officials m urban areas to consider and develop the much
needed balanced systems of transportation. Without sufficient
assurance that the required level of aid will be made available at
the correct time , it will be extremely difficult for us to implement our plans m the tJme we have," he said.
"I therefore strongly request that your Subcommittee recommend the restoration of the full $230 million sought in the
HUD budget request," Rich concluded.
MARTA REVIEWS
"BUSWAYS IDE.N'-cosTs, TIME EXCEED ESTIMATES_
The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid
Transit Authority recommended that no attempt be made to
implement the "Rapid Btisways" proposal made recently by the
Atlanta Transit System.
Richard H. Rich, MARTA Chairman, stated, "The proposal
has been given serious and objective consideration and study
over a period of approximately five weeks. Contact was made
with Atlanta Transit System personnel and additional material
was obtained from them_"
"Based on MARTA's study and review of the "Rapid Busways" proposal, MARTA concludes that implementation of the
busways proposal as it now stands is not practicable," Rich said.
The report contains three basic conclusions:
1. The costs to develop the busways were seriously underestimated. MARTA estimates that the costs would be about
$150 million, rather than the $52 million estimated in the Busways report.
_2. Time schedules for construction were also seriously underestimated. No busway could be made operational in less than
3½ years, the same time required for the East Line of Rapid
!ra~sit. Pre~aration of the rights of way for either rails or pavmg 1s essentially the same. The interim between completion of
bus-:v~ys and completion of rail rapid translt would range from
a mmimum of one year to a maximum of three years.
3. The amount of busways coinciding with MART A routes is
no more than 50 per cent, and quite likely as little as one third
and would require considerable expenditures which would neve;
be recovered by MART A.
MARTA made two recommendations in the report which
was sent to Mayor Allen:
1. Because of the high cost for very short term relief, implementation of the "Rapid Busways" proposal should not be attempted ; and
2. If the public interest demands an experimental development of busways, any experimental busway should be built
along MARTA's East-West Line.
Rich commented, "The MARTA Board instructed the staff
and con~ulting e~g~neers to take the "l<.apid Busways" proposal
and to fmd out 1f 1t would work, and how to implement it if at
all possible. Their findings as to cost and construction time required indicate _that developing the "Rapid Busways" system is
Simply not feasible. While $150 million is indeed much less than
t~e _cost of _Rapid Transit, busways would not do the job of relie~mg traffic as will be required for a permanent, long-range solution for a city of 2 million people."
"Although there is a great differential in costs " Rich concluded, " it would be much more wasteful to spend $ 150 million
for an inadequate interim syst~m than to spend $350 million
for permanent and efficient relief. "
Robert L. Sommerville, President of the Atlanta Transit System,. de~cribed the MART A review as a "perfunctory brush-off'
and md1cated that he would continue to urge acceptance of the
idea.
The MART A review notes that the "Rapid Busways" proposal does not take into proper account the costs involved in rioht
of way acquisition and relocation of railroad tracks, utiliti~s.
and households. Whereas the Atlanta Transit System fioures are
by admission estimates, MARTA engineering consult~ts (Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel) have been working some 14
'.11onths developing accurate statistics on which to base cost proJections. Thus much of the information required in the review
of the b_usways proposal was already on hand when the proposal was f1~·st made. PBTB has been checking and testing these figures agamst other mformation and informs MART A that the
figures given to and used by MART A reflect the most accurate
(Co ntinued
011
Page 3. Col. I J
�LANDSCAPING
AND RAPID TRANSIT
The recently created five-man Advisory Committee will provide professional advice to the MARTA Board of Di~ectors ~n
a number of fields involved in the development of rapzd transit.
H. Boyer Marx, who represents lands~ape ar~hitects o~ th~ Advisory Committee, explains the function of hzs professzon m the
overall evolvement of rapid transit.
Southern Railway line looking south toward Ponce de Leo'! A ve'!ue
bridge at Sears. The many side tracks and spurs must be kept m service;
this creates a problem for either busways or rapid transit, the solution of
which is complex, costly, and time-consuming.
(Continued from Page 2)
information available. These figures, while available, were not
sought or used by the ATS in development of the busways proposal.
The acquisition of right of way and its preparation for either
rails or paving of busways is an expensive process, accounting
for about 70 per cent of the expenditures. The West Line has
perhaps 400 individual households an d small businesses which
must be purchased, and the occupants relocated to new and
suitable quarters. This is a matter of lengthy negotiation, and
would be true for busways as well as for rapid transit.
The railroads usually occupy the center of their right of way;
this means some tracks will have to be moved to one side to
make room on the other for transit right of way.
Buried public utilities are virtually everywhere. They must be
relo cated (and kept in service while being moved) , so that they
can be maintained later without disrupting the transitway.
These costs for right of way, track and utility relocation have
been inadequately evaluated in the busways proposal, and account for much of the spread between the $8½ million ATS estimate and the $40 million MART A estimate for the proposed
12 mile west to northeast test leg.
Since the width of a busway is abo ut the same as for rail
rapid transit, the same amount of money an d time is required to
survey, appraise , acquire, clear or relocate, drain , bring to grade ,
and provide structures for installation of either rails or paving.
Other questions which would have to be resolved relate to
the legality of MARTA entering into such a development. The
MART A Act establishes the Authority to develop a "rapid
transit system." The "system" is later de fined as using vehicles
"traveling on rights of way fully protected from other vehicular
and pedestrian traffic." Under the "Rapid Busways" proposal,
buses would travel at times on regular city streets with other
vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Also, the vehicles would be
owned and the system operated by a private company rather
than by MARTA.
A further question is raised as to whether the building of
roads for exclusive use of privately owned buses would comply
with the law. "Busways" proposes the building of roads with
public funds for the exclusive use of a private enterprise corporation. No reference is made in the "Rapid Busways" proposal to
indicate intent on the part of the Atlanta Transit System to
lease or to operate under franchise the roadways to be constructed, or in any way to share in the costs of development of
the busways.
(Continued in Col. 2)
The interest of the Landscape Architectural profession and
responsibility to MART A rests in the harmonious use of space,
the impact, and aesthetics in a proposed rapid transit system.
The impact of clearing the necessary wide right-0f-way may
be positive or negative, depending upon the degre~ of_ c?ordination of the technical people involved. The profess10n 1s interested in seeing that the grading within and
along the entire planned system is carried out with restraint, and with as
much freedom from bulldozer destruction as possible, consistent with sound
engineering requirements. Nature is !he
best architect, and as much of the
native growth should be retained as possible. Areas free from natural growth
should be supplemented.
To the Landscape Architect the rid- r..,_.;.,t,lj...,...__
ers' view from the trains, even though
H. Boyer Marx
rapid in movement, becomes extremely importan~. A n~st~ul_setting, stimulating yet relaxing landscape vistas, w1~h ?1sc~plmed
hedges, tree groupings and grass lined avenues, bnngmg incomparable naturalistic landscape within the sight ?f the trackage
and the traveler, is our prime concern. From without we want
to see the severity of the concrete structures softened by groupings of flowering trees and low maintenance plant ~ateri~. .
The Landscape Architect is vitally concerned with vanat~ons
in design and plantings of the pedestnan plazas at the van~us
stations to provide smooth traffic flow yet produce a pleas.mg
setting for Architectural structures. We desire to see entrance
plantings dignified but inviting with achievement of sym1:1etry
by the correct use of plant material that will not outgrow its allotted space.
. .
.
It is the unique contribution of the profess10n m advancing
the techniques of accommodating the MART A structures to the
sites and the development of the site to its maximum benefits
and usefulness to all groups.
H. Boyer Marx, owne r of H. Boyer Marx & Associa tes, At lant a, is a
gradu ate of Mich igan State University wi th a RS. Degree in Landscape
Architecture. His ex perience mcludes D1recto rsh 1p of Ci ty Plan nmg an d
Landsca pe Design, U.S . Housing Au th ority; Directo rship of _Land sca_pe
an d Site Plannin g, Region 4 , Southeast U.S. , Federal Public Ho usmg
Auth orit y. He is a member of American Soci_e ty of La n_dscape Arch_1tec ts American Hor ti cultu ra l Socie ty, Ame n can Plannmg and C1v1c
Asso~iatio n, and Southeastern Chapte r, ASLA.
(Continued from Col. 1)
MARTA attorneys advise that the above and other questions
would have to be resolved legislatively or judicially before
MARTA could participate in the activities proposed in " Rapid
.
Busways."
There is another serious question: whether Federal Aid could
be used to build such private roads, even if it should be determined that MART A's legislation would allow the Authority to
participate.
Copies of MART A's review of the "Rapid Busways" proposal are available at the MART A offices.
�MARTAnswers
RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS
MARTA is called on to answer many and varied questions about
rapid transit and the plans for this area. The more pertinent questions
will appear from time to time in RAPID TRANSIT PROGRESS under
this heading, answered by MARTA General Manager Henry L. Stuart.
SEATTLE officials expect a final report from transit consultants (De Leuw, Cather & Co.) by October, outlining just what
the city's rapid transit plan should be. Indications are that it will
be a network of 50 or 60 miles in length, costing about $750
million. If it is approved by civic officials, a referendum on a
bond issue will probably be set for January or February, 1968.
SAN FRANCISCO Bay Area Rapid Transit construction is
booming the economy. During June, 2,245 construction workers received $3,000,000 in wages from the 28 general contractors and the 71 sub-contractors who are building individual segments of the 75-mile rail rapid transit system and its facilities.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT officials report that over $133 million in matching
federal funds for 73 mass transit programs were distributed during fiscal year 1967. A similar amount is available during the current fiscal year. The House of Representatives has approved
$17 5 million for fiscal year 1969.
OHIO Governor James A. Rhodes has estal:!lished a statewide transportation committee to study mass transportation
problems in his state. One of the main jobs of the committee
will be to meet with regional counterparts to coordinate local
programs. There are 15 comprehensive transportation studies
underway at the present in Ohio.
QUESTION: THERE ARE MANY UNUSED OR LITTLEUSED TRACKS INTO AND OUT OF ATLANTA IN ALL DIRECTIONS - WHY DOESN'T MARTA JUST RUN RAPID
TRANSIT TRAINS ON EXISTING RAILROAD TRACKS?
ANSWER: Very early in the study of rapid transit for the Atlanta region the possibility of using diesel electric commuter cars
on existing tracks was very carefully considered. The proposal
was not accepted for a number of reasons.
Rapid transit, to be successful, must move large numbers of
people rapidly and comfortably at frequent intervals. The Atlanta system will use trains traveling at maximum speeds of 70
miles per hour, with an average speed of 40 m.p.h., including
station stops; operating at intervals as often as every 90 seconds.
Railroad operation conditions in the city require speeds as low
as 15 miles per hour in many places. This would slow rapid
transit trains to the point where they would be no more rapid
. than the expressway.
Also, it would be necessary to operate rapid transit vehicles
on the same tracks with freight trains, passenger trains, and
switch engines. This would invariably cause delays to the railroad operation and to the rapid transit operation, neither of
which would be tolerable. In the same connection, the problem
of maintaining a safe operation would be exceedingly difficult.
Another very difficult problem in using existing railroad
tracks is that there would be no way to provide any service to
Peachtree Street between Brookwood Station and the Five
Points area. A similar gap exists on the West Line from Chappell
Road to downtown.
MARTA's position is that such a service using old cars on old
tracks to inconvenient or inaccessible stations would not be
practical.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Henry L. Stuart, MA RTA General Manager, was, prior
to assuming his present position, Director of Service Control, Southern
Railway System, A tlanta, and was responsible for developing and implementing effective operational control plans for the entire Southern system, and is very fa miliar with the operational procedures and problems.
If you have a question about MARTA or rapid transit, address it
to MARTAnswers, 808 Glenn Building, A tlanta, Ga. 30303.
MARTA ACTION
At the regular meeting of the Board of Directo rs on August
1, General Manager Henry L. Stuart reported that Cousins Properties would have additional expenses because of rapid transit
requirements in the "City Center" project under development
in · the railroad gulch at Spring and Hunter Streets, and that
these additional costs should eventually be borne by MARTA.
The Board instructed Stuart to continue negotiations wi th Cousins Properties to reach' agreement on exact costs which would
be eventually chargeable to MARTA when fu nds were available.
The Board approved a sub-contract between consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel and Law Engineering Testing
Company for a series of test borings for soil samples. (See separate story, page I.)
The Board approved the MARTA review of the " Rapid Busways" proposal, and instructed that copies be sent to the Mayor
and other officials. (See separate story, page2.)
The next meeting of the MARTA Board of Directors will be
Tuesday, September 5, 1967, 3:30 p.m., Room 619, Glenn
Building, 120 Marietta St. , N.W.
R .Al?I:0 TR.ANSIT
BULK RATE
U. S. Postage
PROGRESS
Atlanta, Ga .
Permit No. 20
M ETRO POLITAN ATL A NTA RAPID TRAN S IT AU T H ORIT Y
808 GLENN BLDG. · 12 0 MA RI ETTA ST .. N . W .
PHONE 524-5 7 1 1 ( AR E A CO DE 4 0 4)
A U G U S T
1 9 6 7, V O L . 2,
·
ATLA N TA, GEORGIA 3 0 3 03
N o . 8
Mr. R. Earl Landers
Admln. Asst. to the Mayor
206 Cl ty Ha tl
Atlanta , Ga. 30)0,
~1
PAID
�Mr . R. Earl Landers
Page 2
December 5, 1967
I gather from d i s c ussions that people like Senator Ben Johnson , Mr . Harold Sheats ,
and Mr . George Dillard have a great fear that we will end up paying extremely
large attorneys ' fees for condemnations in the future .
If you should have copies of their legislation , I would apprec iate receiving
copies so that I could review it to see exactly what changes they are proposing ,
C.L .D .
CLD:dhf
Enclosures
�.
•.
•
• I
!
I
,._ ·- work Docwnent: . NO~-- FOR RELEASE·
7/19/67
)


r.


·1 ·
!. ·
• I
•
t'
'
.. ..
~ l:
-l'
I
. .:t ' .
'·
•
••
.
!
i
'
' · •• t
FINANCING ATLANTA'S RAPID
.
. .·.
., , ,
·. i
TRANSIT SYSTEM


.··~ :


..·,·. ~
t;..
This memorandlll11 will summarize the most important ~igure~ on the financial implications ,f or .the local governments of ·the proj ecte_d Metropolitan
Atlanta rapid transit system. It is concerned with t _h e potential impact on
the governments of financing the capital . costs of the system, no part of
which will be amortized from the fare box.
-Il -
l!'--
·1
.. ...
-. .,,,
..
[;
,·...
-·i
i
.I
' I
.I
J
' I
,·
.
I'.


.1


.,
,'.,
·'
It is assumed that the method to be used in channeling local funds into
·' · the system will be contracts between the local government·s and the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid j Transit Authority (MARTA)'. Under _this method, each
parti cipating government would contract to assume its share of the annual
costs of amortizing bonds issued by MARTA, including both principal and
interest payments· and : extending over the entire li'fe· of the outstanding
bonds so issued.
'
·
·
·
On the bas i s of det ai led cons iderations of the potent ia°I impact of the
system on economy, land us e pa tterns and circulation systenls of the local
jurisdictions, a propos e d f ormul a ha s b een devised for allocating the local
sha r e of MARTA:' s capi tal costs among the five participating governments.
This formula uses weighted indexes of population, property 'tax digests
(adjus ted to a true · basis) and employment for both 1965 and 1985·. .. following
i s t he · al location· of costs tha t the formula "·p roduces:
·
Ci ty : of Atlanta .
Ful t on County.
DeKa l b County
Clayton County
Gwinnett County
/
, •'
·II
.i
I
!
I.
56.6%
12 . 0
. 22. 1
5.9
i
..
·1
I
·- 1
I
i
1.
""
.:
...
II
3.4
.,
100 . 0%
I,
The alloca tiorii for Fulton and DeKa l b count i e s, o f course.~ are for
only those are as of .the countie.s outside t he City of Atlanta ; ·
.I
\
.,.
·I
•. '
I,
.:
~ . .1. . .
,:,'
I
The Georgia law establishing MARTA and the transit system also provided
another meth.od of which the participati_n g local governments might handle
their r e spective shares of the costs -- namely, iss·uance of their own general
obligation bonds in behalf of MARTA. -However, it is generally assume·d that
thi's method would not be used because of the pressing need for this qonding
capacity for other capital needs of the local gover·r nnents .
··
~
I
I
~
. ' . ,'
. i
.!i . .
.
1· '
'





. ~; .~
j,,. , \ '
~i :
'
. '
.
.\
.
\
\
.,
' I

~·
~
.,,
Ill


~~--~- .....,~


-~- ---~ --·~------~----.. ' !, .. ,·
.
-I
�1
I(_•. .
I


\·


•
) ._ ' ,
,.
.. J
-~:, ....: ..
' '• .
!
)
.· :, . ,
I
. . .
.. ~
- ..·


f: ..-· ..


•:
. ' 1·
,I
•












~- .
.
. ··-
.I :
· ~:f·. i ·
!
· .• Z ·
•
·:- 't
'•
.\ .
City of Atlanta
Fulton County ·
DeKalb County , _·
.'





~..
.
·-
., .' :·
..: .
\'
..
.. t,
' '
,. ;r
'


,'


62.4%
13: 2 · ·
• ,
r,





•





~
I
'
i •••\
I


I•


••
.... : · , .·.
· ·


. ·


~
i:· ·
1 •
.
·..:. ;
Present timing calls for submittal of the prop_osE:d financial plan for


,


·,,
approval of the participat:fog areas in . 1968, with ·capital .expenditures to
. 1·...
get . underway as soon after approval as possible. ·. In these calculations,
" calendar years are used and 1969 -is shown as the first y~ar for drawing
down capital funds for land purchase and construction. · Federal funds esti- ·
mated to be available: in a fiscal year are shown on _a calendar. year basis -for example, funds ·,to be made available on or after ·July 1, 1968 for fiscal
year 1969 ·are shown for calendar year 1969.
'
'; :\:.··
. .•.





, .-:-. .
.
. ...,. . ·.
,
/
l1
. /1
,~ ,
<
•:./
100.0%
I
.
I
•, .. '
.
. ' ~, .
".
.'
•
The allocation of costs among· the · . · ··/ ,'-"·,_'·, .
three central jurisdictions in this eventuality would be. as follows:·
' · l_, :·· : · ·
., ...
i
•
\ .
~·1
.
j .,
.,
{
! .
' . .
·;'
• !
.· . ·:__ :....:·· into and ·serve_ .. th.eir. geographical area.
. . =·f·
I~ •


,: ._


.. ' .. ·
... ' .··:- \ · '
.·'Ii ·' . :. }would~."~~:~g~:t143.215.248.55/;.~~i~~;.t;~~o::\~~a!y~!:~t~~a:"!o~~t~:~t,'143.215.248.55 16:50, 29 December 2017 (EST)'!:~
• ;.•,i
1·
{
Federal and State Funds
'
The most critical variable in these estimates 'is the potential availability of Federal funds. It is not possible'to pred.ict -with any accuracy
· , . · how much Federal money might be made available. Ncit, only is there the
practical difficulty of looking beyond a current two~year Congressional
appropriation, but there are ·also the serious uncertainties · ·resulting from
,.
the Viet Nam and other international situations. · Theoretiqally the· .Federal
\
government could over time assume as much as two-thirds of the capital cost
·, . of the rapid transit system over and above what the system can produce
from its own revenues for this purpose . However, it would not be realistic
to take this as the basic assumption / . In this memorandum, conservative
and re_asonable premises are taken with.. respeC!· to · Federal ·fund availability.
,
I
,·
,
""
Another variab_le is the . availability of funds from the State of
Georgia. The recent constitutional amendment enables the state government
to ·assume not to exceed 10 percent of the system ' s cost. The actual
availability of this money for this _purpose, · h,o wever, will depend upon
legislative appropriations . In this memorandum, it is assumed that the
state's 10 percent share would be forthcoming . For . purposes of these
estimates the state money is distributed un.j, formly on an annual bas i s over
·
t h_e le_n gth of t he · construction p~riod .
I
II
l
.i
,,
·1.
.. .i :
\
.-,
l·.
'"" .,
!·,·:-.
f
.
·:
.
\:
\
·.
. ··.: ..
... ... -.
. 1"
--.,,_.,..,.-..


• : '


,- - --
R

.
.
.
•'
.,:..~,. ~-·· .·.
G.
.
~ . _ . .,..,, v---,__ ,,,~,;-....
, ....- -..
, ...
. ---"'
'
........ """
,,.
-·---
�..
- - - - ·- -1
r .,
•. !


,I.


•,
!•
..
,.,
'd
·
11
,.
'
I'
·,·
,!
·. .
',
'·
~
.
•. • :
'
.
' :i.. .
·;·' ! ', .
, ; •
··
...
J . ' : ; . ' ~.
, I ,
·:,
\ ·,
' ,.I
,
. i I .-_'·.
.,'
·'.
· ••
.
)
,
'
.
.. . \ ,,
1.
·'
r,
'
The Basic 30-Mile System
J:·::
,,
). ,
.
·::
The_ basic assumption to start off with is that a 30-i~'ile system. would _; _ ;: .,
.'·.,· . be built extending· between Brookhaven on the north, Decatur on the east,


. ·
'·


- !
~ · -:- · ;·.
the Tri-Ci ties on Vie south. and Lynhurst Ori ve on the west, with possible
..-· · -·
.'
., · additional spurs to\ the northeast into DeKalb County and to the northwest
~·., ·--". ~.:_...·
.
· ··
to Nort'1side Drive.· This system would cost $332,000,000 to build
($326,000,000 for .construction and right.;of-way, plus $6,000,000 pre- ·
-~_··.. '. '. ·_'·._·..· ...-· .,.__.111'. ·
. operati_n g expenses) and construction would take nine ,years (1969-1977). ·
l
'
.' .
1;'
'
·. ·..:' -v-· ,I,
I
I
"
It is regarded as fairly certain that MARTA in 1968 could get an
.
immediate commitment for $50,000,000 . for this basic; system from the Federal
. .
, :· · ·:- government. This ·would represent $25,000,000 a .year ror each of two fiscal
. : ' years (1968-1969 and -1969-1970). Prospects are good that Congress will
make available for rapid transit at least $200 ,·ooo ,000 for each of those
years and under the 1'2 1/2 percent-per-state formula Georgia's share would
produce these local amounts.
·
·11
ii
ti
I' ·
.'
· ··
·•


·.


·:
. .
·· · · . ,
. : .-···;
. t . .\
.
r.1'. '.\;·• •1,





•
j,
. ,.
It is also not unreasonable, on a most conservative basis; that
anoth;,r $50,000,000 would subsequently be made available froni the same
sourse, regardless of assumptions regarding Viet Nam. No one- knows for


•..,. ,:; './-i'


..
. sure but two observations might be valid: · 1) if V~et Nam clears up, this
· assumption will undoubtedly be conservative; and 2) if things get worse
and no additional Federal money is made .available after 19·70,· then the
· MARTA syst~m can be cut back but still be operational within the same local
approp;l"iation (as described later);·.
'··
I'
r
.
·r-
~
The $100,000,000 assumption of Federal funds is therefore taken at
the outset, with the followi.n g distribution of MARTA capital fund sources:
... ..
j:
I'
I-
ii
I.
'
I'
..; .
!,
1'.
,,
..., _. ..
l
.' .
•I
'
1i


l ,;


t
, I
,,'.
', : I



,




'
1·
,.
~-.
'
Amount
. i
. cooo ;ooo)·
·: · ...
.· : ·Local
. : State ,.<..
_. ,. Federal
l,
·, $199
33
100
' '
,:
, Percent
_:·"' ····<
.
59.9% ·
10.0 ·.
30.1
'
$3_32
.i
'(
\ : ' ·,
...
· .. .
,
'
l
I.
J' ~
-/
' ~
I
!.
'
i 100. 0%
·t
'·. ;-
!
l
The schedule af the top of the next page shows h~~ · this basic 30-- mile
system. ~ight be financed over the nine-y~ar period. ·
" · ·.
I
·i
.·,\
ll
i .
,,
,.
I'
,\
I








>
.
l'
. : ·i ·
··'
..
.'
· 'i'
' I,
.
~
..
!
-'
,
'
I
'
•
,··· ., ·:
I •
I
\ '.
-: ··
'
'•
1 ..
.
. .j
', .
'l
.
· 1'.
1
t
/ : • . _. i_ l
/
'
. .
·..·;:,1rr. /
l.
k--,'I
J.
I.
\
'
'
I
'
·\I
Y
.
'
\
i '
I,,
I'
[,
I
·1
. •,.
\
! ...
-· ~r,,,_
- ==--=-·,__"""""'="'.,==-,:-~. ;sci_.
,, .... (
P-W ·
·r·· ;·'· ~
·tv~
,.:_ .
---=-=--=-~.-
~f?~'--.;---.
1 ....
,
'. ,
i:-1
�L:-~ --~~ ~~_ci~-143.215.248.55:~~----:
1
- - - 4..- - -- -~ ~ ~ .. _· _
· _·
...~.1.. ..-
••
..
-~-:__~-~~-- :hh:,.143.215.248.55-~"<. ·.
!·..a.. ~ •
r. ·./ .~
•
·•


.
 :


' •'.
··.·
·.
.I .
•
.....
.. '
~ !!
.
I
Table · 1,
. '-:;
.
./~t \:\<:.
·~
\
\~
•
I
. ,.
.1
,1 j
I :•
' ~-.
. ·. ·1- : ·_ '
)
.
$ 25
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
!'975
1976
1977
r
. :I··.
. !.
'
. f' ~
.. -----. ?t;
·4 .
$ 25
54 ·
.I.
8
207
258
298
•
$
$


. I .


,_. I ,
\ .:
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
25
··.
\
,· .\ '
·. ·: ' ',\
•;,·
.F '
320
332.
\ .. $100
,., .
•
I
.: i.
y
I
'.f'
35
,\I
·:
'
·,.·


.


so
·- -9
!
I
\
--.::,
..
'
.
,:





' . . , :. ·....
.,.
•; • ; "' I
. I
~
.·
.
? . ~-
~
. _. ,
.
.'
. .. ,··: /,





...·.
. ...

~~
~
~. ~
. •.
.. ~-·
?. '
288
·"
322
332 ·
10
·.,.·
.-


,


'
· -.
.
l •.
I
..
,·


,.·


'.
I
1l
' ..
•
. ~ ·. '
'
... . ~ t


. : {


MARTA revenue bonds supported by
local government contracts
\
··...
83
. $332 .
$199,
$33 ·
..


 
.. ~ ,:


. :,
147 . 1
176 :,·.··... ,-_ ..
... ...
230
234
54 ._._::
.··,·...
\ 34
30
.
. ·. .


..



-.


$ 54


·. :. ; 54"


·.· ·· ,i ,
4
50
'
$ 5,4
. 29
64
. ,;,",
.. . ' } 29
7S
u,~
I. • -
• :
I •
'I
.
.
·, ·
·· · 1
.
•


·,--.


I
POTE.NTIAL SOURCES OF CAPITAL FUNDS FOR
THE 30-MILE RAPID TRANSIT 'SYSTEM
.(.
(000,000)
'.
Drawdown · ·';.
Availabili t of Funds
( cumul. ) · -=F-e-.--er_a_1=----=s=-t_a_t_e__
_-=-L_o_c_a-=-1---=-1-r_-...,T=-o-t_a...,l,--·--....um-u-=1-a-t...1_v_e· .~- /
.I .
J
·, ··' ·.
'•


•


,·, ; · _. ; .
_,
7
.
...
\
. ·i, .. ,
·,,
. -·
.I ..'
.. t ' ·
.· : : ·.;
-,.
..
1'. •••
.
t,
..
}
. . ,, ·, : / I
• •· :
' ...
'
.

...
. '! .
• _1., -;
·.· . ... :.
'
'I
'
I
, 1.
t
As noted in Table 1, this financing schedule . ca11s .for six revenue
, :,.. · bond issues by MARTA. This is only a ·tentative list~ng of the. dates and · ·
amounts of issues, but it indicates ·the timing of needs in gene1al
accordance with the drawdown. schedule (governing fund ava;i.lability for land
purchase and construction) established by the ·engineers. Actually, it calls
for the availability of funds somewhat in advance of needs as shown by the
_. engineers . This is to level ·out and space out the MARTA bond · issued for
· marketing purposes. The drawdown schedule itself is tentative, of course,
and can be revised to accommodate adv~nce purchases of lan~.
•
\.'



,...-




.
· ·._
j;


I


'
..t: ·
··. •. ..
I
.,





•
•• • ~"'
..
..··; · ..·.:.
·,:' •'
It is preliminarily assumed that·:·~ach of the MARTA bond issues


_(guaranteed by pledges from .the local . govenunents) would run...for 30 years


at 4 . 1/2 percent interest. , the annua·1 cost of servicing these bonds (principal
and interest) is shown in Table 2 on the . followfog
page.
/
,,
.
.
.
.
.' ;
, .,I
.. '
·. /
I.
t


_,'


'1
, . · • ' · · ._
!
.
.
-; .'


1


,.•1
f- ·
'. : ,'
~ ,!
~1
.'
1·
} ' ·, • I•
' •
'


·;



i


I
..
•
<
> •
. L-
,·
. -.:-· : •
..
1•
•
•J
.\ .• . :;:/? ,_ · · · ' ,/:/,;: :/\·
L .
!•,
'
l
•
i•,
•
-
,.; ,,
,·
~
t
' .
•
.!;·:.
'·
, ~ '• • •
• ;_ : 1 •
•.. '.
,· •" •
I
'
I
I
. '· .
~
\·
,,,. :·
. ., -
~
_,
.


..,• •


'
' 1' • ,
\ ·-.:.
~
,,
,.
'J
,I,.
. .'
• .• { •
•:
t
~ ·-·'----
- ~ ','·
- - -.
·,
..
'·.
l
·,., .-..·,.., 1~, ,: .· ' .
... " · ' ,. . ~
'
•\
j '
I
I
Il
,,
...
ji
\
r ··:,·:. , ·.· .
,.
~
·.J .~:.. ~
�..
,.~~ . ; ~ L~--~ -4.\:__ ~ ~
. . ,,


,·· ;


.
·.143.215.248.55.:_~_.-L~._;.
_~
.
•
i
'
I
... .


.... . , :·. ,..':.'


. . i,
I
•
d-.· /.
.- l;i r·' .
I •
·. -1 ': ~
. •
.
··,: .
I
'
'
_~.
I
'
I
,
I
.I
I
I
-I
'
. I
' .•





I
' ·,.
..
Bond Issues
Interest .
••
!; . - :
~
•'.
•
I.
.
.
. ..
I .•·
.





, •
I
'
•
• ••
• !.. • •••
!
... ·, . ; - : . < .'
I ,:
,
• • .,
. :-~. i .
. ·:. . . .
!'. .
.;.:-.:.
1
,,
.i- - -..· / ') .
- :
.
I •


·


. .·
.,
~ .
..
. ·"'..··>'•


\


. ,
I





• j ,


-.:


. .
.
L"
. :
·,:
'
.! ·, •' -. ,.
··F
......
~
'•
.i ..'_.
·· · .· .: · . Ann_u al
.
· .:,_::.' Cost 1/' · : : ·
'Total
I.
, /
~
I '.
.
' ;_,_ :
1969 :;' : , \ ' $ :25 I 000
.. ·.:.. $1,825
$ 20,605 ·$ 45,605
-1970 .: ....
I,':,·
. 1,825
'i!,·:


4 1 380


.
28,847 ~
63,847. '~
1971 . · ,. . ·:- 35,000 .
.
1972
.,
· 4,380 '· . , .
. ' • . . ,.
·, ;_.
r.8,Q3Q '
41,210 .· _. 91,210.
1913
,'-: 50,60_o
·····'.:
'
1974
.,
.\
'
.,. .
J
.7, 725
... '
_i;:-",\ •
,.
'
·' ~ ..
1975 • .·_: ,, '\ 50,000 · · '
!:_, / . 11,375 -' ·
41,210 91~210
',. ..I' .
. 54,726' ::: · · .' 13,138
30,000 , · •, . 24;726
., . 1976
\
. · ,.:
' 1977
9 1 000 I
7 ,418 ..:··
16 ,·418
13,795
,I .
1978
. 13,185
'
1979
·,
<.
13,185
r !.:. ..' :.i. '\• ·.:.


.


1980
· . 12,575
.
1981 !"
l2,209 _. , .· 12,099 :·.··_
1982
·. '•: : '.·
.. ,
- 12,099
· :·
1983
'.
.. .
. .
.\ et seq
· $199,000
$164,016
$363,016
,·





.
I
. . ·. . : . ::-
,
~, ... I
.
j ' •.
I
·;
\
•·.
-. .
.....
1
. ! \.
I .. !
,.
·; '
.· ' '
ANNUAL CARRYING CHARGES OF MARTA=·.··,·,
REVENUE BONDS, 30-MILE _SYSTEM
1
(000)
<.:,, -.! ·..
• I
'i . '
. ':,,
. .Table 2,
~
•
.:,'_; · :." _·,-.
f,
• • ~· \
•
j .-._
/ <-:' :- : :·.. ,· '


• : :·. · I ·


. ·, ... . . . l , ·
. . -~.· ~ . :. .:··
. .. ... ·j
I
)
.-_·. 1·
.~
~ ~ ~' - ·1
~ ~~
. I
i.
'•


·


'
I
f
'
.:·-~': :~_·. ·,? ./
l
••
··
\
•
' ~
'.
. ,· :
.':j





.. \"
j
I
•
i
..
,
!
II '
~
I
. <,'.•·
.,!
j '
'
..


-. :


\ ~- I •
••
•
I
Y·
'
•
1
I
~.
Amortization (priricipal and interest) charges
of all outstanding . MARTA revenue bonds to be
assumed by ·1 ocai" governments under contraqt ·
with MARTA.
.
It is noted in Table 2 that the annual cost of servicing these bonds·
· drops off after 1977 (the date of the·· last issue) and declines to a level
-~
amount in 1982. This is because a 20 . percent sinking fund' reserve is
{j
, provided for over'- the first five years of each· issue, and at the encl of
'. five ' yearseach issue then ca rries a level payment to maturi ty. In effect,
s ix ye ars of payments are made in the first five years of ea~ h issue , and
the amor t i zation period is a ctually 20 inste~
years. The l eve l
cost of $12,099,000 would continue through 1997 at which time -it would drop
as the 1969 issue would have been paid ·o ff,. and so on until --a-1 is;ues are
/ · amorti zed .
·
· . '.
1/4_ ·
[_ , J
I mp act on Governments . It is a ssumed that all of the local cost · o f
th is ba s ic 30- mil e syst em would initially b e · a ssumed by the thr ee centra l ··
governments -- Atl anta, Fulton and DeKa lb - - i na smuch as t he system would
not reach out· into Clayton or Gwinnett. Later . however , if and when t h e
sys tem . is extended , · the outlying counties would pick up their p ro r ata
i
i


·


, I
I
I
~~ .,.
'
·' .
, 'J
·, I
J


I


I
,~
'
..
.t·.'· .... .


1··


'
C
I '
.
', .
.i
~
'
,*' •'
'
t
•
•
' :•
I
',
'
~
�I · :~
"----=..c.'.'.-:~.......~......:.-:ii..,:............:..:.... LL::.:..:...--'------~'--~-~-··--·-~'
1j.l
1!.
,,
,,

. . ..
' ·~ ' . ' .I _:
-
.• •
. ;I.
,r
,i
I
I
sh~res ; of this · basic cost. · For purposes of this calculation ~;. and
· :'. ·.approach to th~. governments _and the people of the three- counties
·. ·. , full impact of this basic system upon only the three_ governments is
· however.
'the
,.... ---·; ... .
.the ·
, ., .: · ~
assumed ·. ·' .i=' .:.. ·: ·
· -
· - 1 ·,. ·:\
U
i: '
i: 1·
/ '
.
I
,,1·
~(:' ::·i, ,.
' '{:,;-'_\>~ ·
• :/~:_.: - . · -:· ·
1


· ~ i


'.; . ·: ·., .·.


_.,


. .. ,.
·:- ,
. ' : ~ ._.:::.:·
Using the forin~la set forth earlier, the respective governmental shares
of the annual costs ·of this basic 30-mile· system are shown in .Table 3, below.
This is not the recommended funding schedule, however, . Later , it is
recommenclecf that substantially higher payments be made by the governments
to MARTA in the early years in o·rder to reduce the peak loads· in later years.
,
\
\'
'
'
. !
' , .•
. !,
\

Table 3.
_;
..,
.. .\
..





LOCAL GOVERNMENT "SHARES" OF MARTA BOND
CARRYING CHARGES, 30-MILE SYSTEM.





(000)
, ,_
.. .' ·-\ '
' ·,,· ··.: . ,
~
' · ..
'
, :'
!
.'
I
Atlanta
,' '
•I
•
-. I
ii'


j


.·.·
.
I
' '





'
I•
·'
I
'
..~ .'-_
' !•
·,
.. : .'\





I .
_ _ ..._
••• • • ....,. . _..
Fulton
1969 ' .- ~.. : ,$1,139
1970
,,,' ·:. l, 139
1971 ._..·. · 2,733
1972• . , . 2,733
1973 ,,· ,! ! 5,011
1974 · '• ·.•:-; 4,820
1975
. ; :·, 7,098
~~;~ ; . . ,_-!
8,198
$. 241
241
"/
578
, . _;
578
,
1,060
'.
1,020
1,502 :·
I


• 1


734 '
'. <1
'821
· ..
'
,
.:. L : t143.215.248.55
· . ;1, 740 ·, ·
', \'· 1 , 740 '
.:· , 8,227'
· , 7,847 ·
. 1,653
. ,
7,618
1,612
7,550
· 1,597
7,550·
· I,597


.;! ; .-:· . :< -



. r. ~:.:.:·..·.· ~--.


, ../
' ·,
.
.
...' -..··
•
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
et seq
Total
$ 445
$1,825
' 1,825
4,380
4,380
. 8,030
7,725 ·
11~375
13,138
13,295·
-~13,185·
'13,, 185
12' ,575
12,209
12,099
·12,099
·'
.
.._ :·
I
I
~
• • .. !
'
'
• ~
I
.,
•::·
I
.,.





•.

~
"
It is recommended that ,·the flow of funds fo MARTA be i1'creased ahead
of actual need in the early years to put in effect some ceiling in the
later years when the annual requirements are so much higher. · This would
'involve, of course, a provision in the agreements between MARTA and the
local governments .making it possible for the governments to make such
.·,: ·
·advance payments to be subsequently applied against MARTA I s revenue bonds
as they are issued, It is assumed that appropriate legal steps could be ·
taken to make this possible (includi_n g the establishment of special , trust
a c counts i n which ~he advance payments could be placed).
i
·
· '.
1
--·..·""-1 ~· ·- -
..
'·
.
.
·
. /·
.
'
J
'.
•< ,.
• •••
.
'
I


•I


.;
.
t.
'
,. I •





• •
'
,·
... ··
i•
·,..;,:·
!-.'~ "· . .
'
·-~ . : .
'.
"·
. ',
', ( .
.,
•' ,
..
~~



. . ;..




'\:
.,
.
,(7'1
.,,,...--J ~.,'. '~
.
.
-- - --'
·
I
-\~
~
,,
l[
11
· Ii'"


/;


ii
.
.
. ' ·::~ L-_-: J ·:.'.<-:- : :
(.
'
.


·:


... •.'
..
·--- ---
-f
.
'
.
·· , .
• I .. - ··
,
.i
DeKalb
445 .
1,069
1,069
1,959,
_1,885'
,2,776
3, 206·
3 ,'366 ~3,217
3,217
3,068
2,979
2,952
2,952
.
. : -:~


~


I
'
I
':~ \i~'
I
'


.· · ·


,l





I';
.
.. .
. \ ; ·'
.,
,,
· ,; ,,.
l· ' '
• I
! ..~ ·.:'
'
. · I'
' ~
l
I '
. . ·!I
• . "
'
.
�. l ~- . ·- " . . . ·-· -~
u..-:-...
11 ,
!r
I; .
.. . : ,.
!:
..
, I
·· t
, ,.
j.
_,.J
--
'
.
.
_ . _ ~ .. a...4'
...





•
.
..
I
•
I
,1
i
·,.:· 1,.·.·:
.. .
I
.. .,
J.:
_:'J : ' '
•
.,
•
.--..J.-





I
-\
•' ,·
I
· -; .
. .: . \
.·. ,i :
,
..!-:'
'
t;
•
,', . _ .. .
t'
.
, ..
", 1.
i' :
L
l
~
1i
' -~





' i.






1 ·. ..


'
.,
I .
· f _.
'I
~
·,
•
I
' . :-.-~
. '
!
• I
• .
. I
. <__;.,,_·,/. . ,,.
.
..
\ ··
..
i
,,: --:
. ,I.
..
·'
.. '. ..
•.
\
..
!'
..
'
'
-~


·l·


..
., .
f·
t
.l.





\
.\
. _JI
l.·
'
.
-~ . •. ! .•


1·


'
I
l1
I· ,
· · )tlanta ,.
···:
.·,,;·I
,,: ,./.·· . .
.
cooo)
I
.
\:
I
'
1969 , \ $.2, 828 _·
1970 . ,; . . 2,962 ·
1971 ·:
4,659 .
1972
4,884
1973' , ·
5,121
1974
•,• . 5,373
1975 .·;. ' 5,643
1976
' 5,922
19776,222
1978
· 6,537 . '·
-1979
6,873
1980
7,221
1981
7,596 ..
1982
7,983 .
1983
8,400 _
1984
7,825
1985
7,550
et seq ;
Fulton
DeKalb \
I
$ 598 ·
Total :,'
---
'I
r.
l
I
i · :..-.
.j
·,
.
I





t
.,.·
-:•
,:::/:
.t
..
•


,-'


. ,··..·


·:··/·'.,

-


. . ....
" .. I
$1,106 ' $:'. 4,532 .· ' :
.. --~1,158
. 4,746 : ···.
626 ..
7,467 ·: ·.·
986
1,822
7 827 . ..· ·' .:· ,· . , 1·, 033 :
1,910
·. : 1,083 .
8,208 .: ·. . : .. .... ·..
2,004
2,101
8,611 '..
_
.· 1,137 .
9,043
. .,
. 1,194 .
2-,206 .
2,314 . • 9,489 · .
· 1,253
2,434
~- 9,972 . ·.
.1~316
_. l",383.
2,556
10,476 .-.' · . .
11,op ·· · · ·· 1·
1, 45_4 '
2,686
11,571 ·
2,823
1,527
1,607 ',
2,979
12,174 .3,122
12,792
1,689
1,777 ·
3~284
13 ~461 .
...,.,
12,540
1,65_5 ,
. 3,060
,





2',;952
.
12,099
.1, 597
'
I
•
'
•
• •I
i
·.,·
l
I,
~
•
.l
. As noted, the required payments drop off substantially after 1983
/and from 1985 on they run at a steady rate of ;$12,099,000 until bqnd
retirement dates. . In the earlier years, . th_e governments pay in more than
MARTA currently needs · (through 1974) . Between 1975 and 1983, · they pay
in less but the · advance payment reserve covers the carrying charges above
t he current flow .
·
·
,
!
• I
• I
,
/
The full payment schedule to. the y_ear 2005 is given i n .Appendix · 'Tabl e .. Bo
--~ ·
.i:
. ~-
I'
.
.r ;
·,
.





~t.' '
. :·
.


. ~.


..
·
I
~
· :\l :.
.,
·1
,, ~
'tr,· '~
.·i...-
. .
t
~· .


~ ·...


( .
...• .
.
. .I
,
'! !
• • • • • ••
,.
.:t,' . .
Table 4; · RECOMMENDED PAYMENT SCHEDULE
•• · .1
TO MARTA, 30-MILE SYSTEM


I


' . . ·. '.
'
· '_
The schedule 'of recommended payments that would operate with these .
. .. · .. ' . ·-1ceilings is shown below in Table 4. The millage rate equivalents. are
• . . : ..:· shown and discussed later,
, •.
.
.I
'
.~
.
..
i .

A realistic procedure might be to schedule payments so that the tax
.· i ;
burden in no local governmeiit would ever exceed the equivalent of: 3 mills
... .
. - , " . ... ·.
against the net.. property tax digest - for the 30-mile system. Inasmuch as
. . . • .I
Atlanta would carry 'the main burden, this in effect would mean a schedule
· in which the Atlanta impact would be held within a 3-mill ceiling with the ·; ·· · .·
other two_ governments carryi_n g lower proportional ceiHngs . . · · ·
··
. !; ·
'
·- 7- -
-I
.
i.
l •
l
J
·::··
··:·
,,·. · : ,
,.....,....__
~,. . 1----__.--..,......-----_i.,.;
0- -~- - :·
. ~-..,
~
·r""J;!-09~....""j!'-""'ar---;,---.-.""'\...,_•..,i.,..,·.,._- - - - ,...


1·


~""-
'1
_·
" ": ) - . ,. - .,--
.
- . . . - - - - - - - - ; , -- .,
.:
�... ---- - - · - -~
..---- ~------·~·~--~(-·.--~- .......
I :,
'.) . '
,;
..
j,·
I
I I
j
.·.: • I
I
r,
It
.....
'i (
I
.
,
. I
.
• !.. .
I
.. (( .1
..
.. ,'
.,
)
,.·
~
,.
... .
. · :'
,.
, ,_,
· ;! \.
t:
j:
A great deal of research has been done (with the cooperation of the
.·· ' local ·finance officers) to set these MARTA requirements within the. frame,. / ·· . :
1 work of overall future financial needs and resources of the local ·govern· . . ,,: ,'.' ments. This research documented what was already known :...: that e·ach ·of the . · :i' \._ ·
• ··
local governments .faces financial difficulties in the future. · Both capital


 

..




and o·perating needs' ·'. are steadily mounting_ in the face of limitations of



...




funds from existing ·sources. The seriousness of the situatio~ was highlighted _.j· ~-by careful foreca·sts that were made of future expenditure levels in ·each
..: ·' ·
jurisdiction (tied into official forecasts of populat.i on and employment) and


. : : .;-,. . ...


• .
of future revenues from existing sources (also tied into official forecasts . ·.. : .·.( _r_,-./ :
and additional · estimates of factors such as the tax digest affecting fund ,:
·.. ·.,
<... ' '·:,. ·-~.
availability).
,: ! ·
·
1 '· ·'
I·
!
1


.! 1 •


.:.
· 1··
·.1
1 . .
.I, '
.I·
'
·..,. ,'.
...., .
·l
h
, ·, I
'· Lf


·t.


tr
..
j;f
•
·
•
I
.-
> • "\ ,' ,:
•
•
Three tables -- 5-A, 5-B and 5-C -- summarize ~ey figures from this
· : analysis for the City of Atlanta, ,Fulton County and DeKalb.County, respec: ·, ti vely. These : tables are presented in . sequence fopowing
·
. . this page.
.
j\'.
!I
'i
\
··.,:
. H!
. ,. I
1.1
'
!ii
• 11
II
·!-!.
j,i .
I,
ft
.
. I:·.
1:1· .....


1·

i


i::.
·1,;I•
. !!
, · ' : ·. : ,
Detailed rese.arch was also undertake·n to anticipate the potential reve;. · ,:; ·,· ·. ·
nues that might be obtained from new sources . . Many new sources were studied
and the research effort was tied into similar explorations undertaken by
other groups (s.uch as '. the Georgia Municipal Association). Two sources were
singled out for particular study _;.. a local option income tax and a local
option payroll tax ·-- both of which are being currently employed· in cities


an.cl u:9-an areas thro_u ghout the. .country. ·



r


•H
•
• • .


' ·


1+ ·
I
• I
..
In . these tables, estimates are _presented of the'·current operati_ng funds
/ : required by each government for the future years of 1970 ,· 1976 ·and 1983 .
\ ·-- .:, These estimat~s do not include self-supporti_n g services but, do include de
, \ · service charges on general obligation bonds. The tables al'so present
ti, , · ~
1
)
mates of projected operating revenues of these governments for th.1/s-ani'e years ,..-,v
_·:.;-.-_· ·.· :··. ·
,from existing sources, including revenue from debt service · taxev. In every · 1/case, substantial "deficits" are . indicated -- potential defi"c'i'ts, that is, ·
unless additional revenue sources are made available. The. tables ·also show
estimates of the potential yields of
sales· ·tax in each of the years. The
. MARTA requirements (taken from Table 4, earlier) are then shown for comparison.
·a·
'
.
~
.
It is important to note that only one-half of the projected yield of the
l percent sales tax is shown for. general. government
- operations. in these tables • .
I
. It is assumed that the other one-half would be made available to the schools
.,, under existing proposals.
•/
I
.
The property tax situ'a tion should be particularly noted. 'If the recent _ · 1/
.
court decisions hold up that would require all property to be assessed· at · ~
·
~O percent of tru value, some ch~nges· in tax rates will be necessary simply
. r.r--- ~
to produce the same yields as would be produced under existing ratios and .
_rates, :








·
··
·.
\
'
..
I.
, I•
-: .· i
'
"'t.
.-.!,









'
.' ,
..,
... ,: .
\\
~('.-
~
- - - - - -- -- ,~ .. ., ~
! ,, "\ ~
r'1
- --~ - ,-,.,- ,,.,,,,..,.__,..,_...,,,....._ _,F..,:""'·'1--Jw ,. ... ~. nil
...--...---...........
,, ...
,,_ ...,,,.,_,...,,,......_
�I
. , ~--C:-·--·-·-·=
i ',.
. ': .
.

. . =·: .
/
..
•
' '
Ii
~-
I:
..r;:-· (
' :'.


~


,
..
l
···-...
I
'\
. ~. .


_._.


~
. I
..• · I
Table 5-A~
.J
~
I .
.·
. . } \ --
· 1! .
~
..
l ~i1
·,
FORECASTS OF CURRENT FUND REQUIREMENTS AND .
.POTENTIAL' FUND AVAILABILITY, ATLANTA
(000)
. .
.. '
.· ( •..
-
~
. ti
. ' I
..
. ', .
,11
Fund requirements ('excluding MARTA) · · ;
I , •
I
1976 .··. .
1970
·.,,
Ir · · ·
!i[.I'
'$71,056 :::.·_.:. $100,896
$48,905 ·
't
··.'.!:-:: ·
Available funds, exis·ting .s ourses:
, . . Property tax (40% vai'uation and ·. · : ;.
adjusted millage) , 1/.
, . . -19f267
Non-property taxes . .
23,390
,'•
'





,•
26,097 ·.
31,682 1
,.
,1
. ;, · •, $42,657 ,·
.
~
...
~-/ \ i
... ·i
.
-·~ .,,37,557
.
45,594
,.
,1 ,.
I
-


I


. ;:.· ·;;.
..
~'
.
!
.
\
\
·, .
, $ 9,377- .,
·. _i.:- ,,; .





·I I
.
•
~
I
1:
'i •
. 'j.,
.•
-.4
(2 ~O}.Y
· .· ' ·
.,
. . ·j ·· .
.,, ,$ 26,145
.
l.Q
·
3.9
i
'!
.
,,
...
•
'· :·
II •
•. ,
.
•
- ' •,"
.
.
'I . ,


., 3.0 ·


1
·1


..4. 3 ·


.1-
,.
• I
'I .
~
, , . .: .. •
. ·,·. +.2 ..
. - .1
3,0
I
'. Total.
,·
$14,001
·12,144
' . ., .
. ' ~. .
~,.·
J· ...
·\
.
._ ,
'
• ••
\ (\; )':
$19,199:
,• ,
$ 26,145 .


.,
,'·,
·:·,:>.\ 1;: .':.<,


Millage rate needs:


To· offset change in
. ·:
assessment iatio · 4/ ·
For· MARTA
. , . For; other purposes ~
•
•
. · ·_·?'.,i):;. .
'
/>
. ; ii1'
' ..
.,
I
$ 17,745 .
8,400
i.·-,'. ~,_i-_$
,.
.... ..
, ..
$ 83,151
·$57,779 ;•
Proj.ected operr·~i_n g '.'defici_ts'._'L· ·;.:._ $ 6,248 · · ·_. , $13,277 ) ',:
·,.
·. .. .-::. .· · . 2,962
5,922 ...
. Plu~MARTA 2/
T~tal "deficits" · ·,, ·. · · ·.}
·9 ,210) . . $19,199 ;.__· '
.
i'.. -.. ~·!.f.... . ! .
·_ ' . t .


'· i . ' '•


\ .. : .
·Additional fund sources:
$11,54( .·
"i ;;_:.:::: . .-. . $ 9,377
. .. Sales tax 3/
/
! .... . I .:· •:!... .~ .. .
.7 ,655,.
Property tax
·-
,I
..·'.'
·. !· ·
I
i~'
! ;
.
!
II
'·
-; ·, 1/ Assuming millage rates that would produce th~ same yield
,·
--~-~l- -
.... .
at 40% assessment ratio 'as present rates produce at pr~·-:'° ·
sent assessment ratio (see 5 below)
2/ Recommended lev·e 1 for 30-mile system (see Tabie--. , earlier) ;
3/ · one-half of projected yield of one percent tax
.·,1
r equired in existing millage to get some field
!I Change
at new 40% assessment tat'io
·!
·
"' .,... , ·! , .
•' .,
l: •
5/ .. A pledge for bond purposes only
.\ ~ To produce property tax additions shown· aboye (i_n ·.
addition to MARTA) · · ·
.I
I
'I
•' •





.
. !· ' . ~. ;
·! ·'":


. .'


,i
'
~
'•
.
/
., ·· ... I
.\
. ·: '
I'.
.
·: .. . ..
,


,.


. , ..
I
.1 . .
I
I
'
I
I
.
'


!


.,
I
,' I
\


.


!
.
)
.
I
/ '.
'
-.J
~
~
I
.
....
I
' ··





....
. ,.,.
~
, '
..,
,
~
I
u..,,. ..~ " .·
',.
,·
j
·,

~==-'~
.'
11!1 ','
, JJ!,.§§'l
\j -"'l'~'l'!'l,=
.
.
=if=,=.
.i : .,
,._
I '
, .. . ..
I
t :.
.,
.
.. ~- . . .. :.
... ·
\ .
r
I
.


' .


·.\ .
.
"
.
\: :\.
\: ' 1
I
I
\.
..
"' ·
P4·
.· r-.-"1!11~--.-\.'""""".=.. - -;-. =,o;=:~-=====....J""'=.,......_--=p=·
\ •
'*=";===-,
"""i,;_, ,o=
l.
I•
I
1
,
·. .! . .' : '
..;9~ -
l'7:~\
,1
· !'·... , · .
' .•::
' l-•"~ 1---- -- · --·_ · ._f
~ ,.. ,. ~
\
,...
j
.'<- '. . :
·: ._
. .•
,,•
~
'
I
'
1.·
·:.,\\.i ~-,
f.- 1
• - f~
r--,
i
0
t9Fl
_
Jt
�..
,,
I
.,
.
,I
~
.
·.. 1:,-' (
.·.
f :.
'
\ , ,,
•
·..
'
.: ,: • : .. :
..
'. . , ·:,
,, '
.. ,
I.
'. ,
':
I
' i
i.
.
.


,


'


' -..


i.
J • . ; ..
~
• : _ ,/
.·-.
. -, · ,-'. ,~,. .
, I •,••
.
..
.:-:-.~~>-._-··. ·.:-:
'
'
1970'
1976 , . .
Fund requirements ('excludi_ng MARTA)·.. :. :·.: · $45,044
•
·i ·-.
I
I
i .· '
I












'i ' '
,• I'
!'
!'
_'





.


..


?
l ·.• · '
.
. I
!
'
' '
Additional fund sourbes:
I
Sales tax 2/.
\_
I
Property
-· '


4






tax ·
" . II
I
I
.





.


•


.
..
./
'·
\
. .
··"': :
.
!J
_,,,· ·.
·.
i Net change
. . \ .;
, \ . i" .
,·.
~ - i:_
Millage rate needs:
'
'.,i,
. To offset change in
assessment ·r atio 3/ -- .' ·-' ·
For other purposes
·: ,'
'-', :
,"
~~.. .
_:i ·• ' -; : .
)
$
-3,074
·: . =-··\ ·,;·~- ~: : ·i ,
- :. ' 3,648 ·,
...
•
'
.
.' ' '
~.: .
0
f,
i_ • • • •:
. $ 6,722
,' .
· ~-





~·.·-.\:i:_'. ~. .
..
,I
·$14 ,6_o s··. :,
$ _. 20,028
•
1
~
.'-
$
··...
. . 'l
,"'·•
.
5;834
14,194
.. .
.. .5
- .<'.4
•
I
..
.-. : ·. _·.· -4.3
. +3.8
"."4,5
+4.1
-2·. 8
.: {'..r i . ,- ..
·.., : · MARTA '· requirements
\
Millage rate needed 5/





' .:·_":'. : -.
-4.8_ -',. · .
. +2.0
I..
'


·.(\ .·. f ,•


~
....
'1
. '•
.
,
$.
. : .': ! •... _. .
..
626
1.3
J
$ '. 1,777
· i __l.5
$ 1,253
1. 7
,..
y
In effect, the same· as . a'_projection based on existi_n g ,· ,·
valuation ratios and existing millages
··-'.:, '. / ·
' ·<··.· 2/ One-half of projected yield of ·one percent tax , . .. ' .·
'1
!,
The change from . the existi_n g mill_age rate te> pr..,~duce
... ,
t h e f unds shown·· in the s e cond line, above, at the .
,.,,,/_ ..,; ·
adJ'usted 40 p ercen t _asses sment rat i os .._
_/
.,.,; y To pr oduce the a ddi t i ona l property tax funds shown
"'
\'!:
above as needed
·
.
·
~ .· Outside the City of Atlanta only
•
"1/
,,
'
!
'
/
/
. \
\
'
.,·_. ' ,.,
., ,
'j
I
,i
', 1, ·_
I
,.
'
l.
I;.
..
,:
. J, _;
!


I


.
'
"'


, 1'


i.
! •
1,
.
·_-.}· .r: ..
•
·;;,:·~ Ff
g =st
'
,:. . . :··:: !\>
...
\ . .
1'
I•


- 1,


•
.:-
. . :1 ··
r
. 1."\.: .
..
' /
,
)
'


• ·', .: ,:/' i• •:


• •
'
I
J,
'. ·~l()'j ;_-'i :'
,.
'
~-.·, \
•
I•
~
\
•
···',~ .I I '
,,
'
!_ ;,·:· .·· ·: ' .:J.. :
•
.. · ·: .
. . .'.
I
·,
\'
(
ich; ,
\.
'
. ,: '
I
"
. .. .
. ,· ...
. ._,.
', 1.
\ !,
' :
$ ·20 ,028
$ 4,321 >
- 10·, 284 '
~
,
...
$ 80,855
' . !f,;'
1
!,
I
·, •
' ,$38,322,J ' ·$53,728', /'
Projected operri.ng "deficits" , ':.~ . · $ 6, 722 · . $14,605
...
! ·. '
•
.'] '
,:- .·
,' I
.. . . . :·' •.
•
'


·. · ·


. -; , '. :'
,, \
.f. · ) · .
. '
' \
,: '. ·· .'. $29,730 ·
$41~682:.. · 1 \ $ _62;727
·.; ·
8,592 .. · 12,046,- . · · ·18,128
,',
•
$68, 333;, . :, $100,883
. . .
1'
. , Availabile funds,. existing sources:


'i . . Property tax ( 40% valuation and .


adjusted millage) , 1/
Non-property taJCes · - ·
.·
~
·,· ·.
.1983
· - - -·.
~
',\
'

Table 5-B • . FORECASTS OF CURRENT FUND REQUIREMENTS AND ·
' ·POTENTIAL FUND AVAILABILITY, FULTON COUNTY
(000)
.·
,: • _! ; _· .
.- •
i
, .. '
> : :
!'j) :,'
\'
-~ :
'I
.'
,· ;· ·.
~
' . ·'
I'
. :~ ~--~-... .
,. ,
I
'
"" ,
'
0
·;
�..
",.
!
t.
l .:
'·
I
·I
.
I
I ' ,'
)
·:i;. : .
I
•
i
••
' .. -··.
' :~
\
. 'i .
'
t
I .
T'.
i .
.t
Table 5-C.
FORECAST~ OF CURRENT FUND REQUIREMENTS AND
POTENTIAL FUND AVAILABILITY, DEKALB COUNTY
(000)
. . :. ,
...
.,
l
... 'I
I-
Fund requirements (excludi.n g MARTA}·.' ...·
·iI
'
I,
., .
I •
. 'I
.
i ;:,• . '
! ... ~. .
.
..
J
·.1
,
.


!i~


1 1
i:
!i
l1.,
f:
'
$34, 766t';~. : $57,958
0
..
./
.




,: .. : . .






I
. Additional fund sources:
Sales tax 2/
\
Property tax
j.
~. 11 --··
. ,f.



$22 ,604/ .




,,
...
,. $ ·6,509 :'·'.
..
·11'i
. i. ···, .





_.\. ;.
i< . ,. ."-:i _~ -
. ~ '~ '
. .
..,,
) . i···
·
1,038
2,805 i .·..
·.•
11 ·
1,
!
,·
.





·
- 1!
.,
111
~ .
L . 1/
.~ ... ) .
j·'
2/
I·
.,I'.
ii·


 :


,,; ·
-
.
I•
,.·,
j. ..
1'
· ·,,
,1
""11
// ~<·_ .:
/
I
,• •'
.'





+2.3 (,
+6, 7 .: ,·


,i,,

I


'. i.:-
,.
·;•
I '
l
I
,.
' +4.2
.• +4.2
$ :3~284
..
,
..
. ' . ,.
'
,.
,.· ·1.8
·~--
.
'
•·
'
i,
•·
f,-
.l·
"
I
·'


· i:


.·
i ,·
'-)
...
f ..·


,


,, l ,
_;.
' • ,1•··
,1
. '
, •'
,i- ·.
. , · '. •I





,,
l
·1 ~.
I.
' ·~11~
'
'\
- ·' ·
. · : •\:
,,


,.,


' .
,:, ·
• •
1.
J
. - ' :;·.
...
·.. , ... . ·,·
•'
' .
.,.
,.
' ;' •
.. -~,-·~ ~1:
'I..
j .


.,


!
In effect, the same as : a projection based on existing,
valuation ratios and existing ·millages
·
· ·>/. ·.
One-half of projected yield of on~ percent t~x
.
The change from the existing millage rate to P'l'oduce
the funds shown in the sec·ond line, above, at the
· adjusted 40 percent ass·e ssment . ratios
To produce the additional property tax funds shown ,.,
above as needed
Outside the .city of_AUanta only
... :
. ... .
I•
!•
_.
$ 4,991
'
$2,314
2. 3 .~
~
•I
.
'
$1,158
1.9
/,
..
...
+6.0
'i_1 /
MARTA . requirements
MiHage rate needed~
.· 1 1.
I.:
I
~
.·.
....
. ·,,.
+1.3
.
I
' $ 4,983
-~-,. " . . · +4. 4 , . _::
· +4.7
Net change .
\
$ 6,509. ; :· $ 4,991
... . . ..... ,.
. .--:~ :.. .. $ ·3,648 ·
·:.. .-·.;. ; ;: : :'.·:. · ..' r:· . .
!·
..
·~\•
~
I
. \
. ;,· ,..···
I
I
.


-~ ... :'. '


·:: ·_··.::··.:--·· ' $ 2 610 . · ( $ 3, 704 / ·. ·
.
.· .
,
_':/:" ·,. ..Millage rate needs:
•· 1 '
· To offset change in
assessment ratio 3/ .·
. ~,:·,
For other p~rposes !/·
. .•
!ti
. '1
,,,
1, '
'.
. ·,
'1





I• .
"
.. i -' ..
·:$42,121
$25,266 .\·
15~837
9,500 .: :. .









,:
$62,941





·1 .. ,.
I .
.:
. , !.
. . ' ',
I
Projected operating "deficits'.' !' : , · $ 3,648
.,...
..
'
' ,.
Available funds, existi_ng · sources: . : _; ;"" :, ,
Property tax (40% valuation and · -. ,, _. 1
adjusted millage) ··1/


.• .. · $16,427


Non-property taxes 6,177
.,
I
!1· .
$26,~52 . .
1983
,,
·.·,
. , i .





1976
$4_1 , 275 ~·;_
1970
••
•
.: -> ,·


er


! ,•·
,; .:
·>
\ : 't .
• I
.I
•
•' .
J
' ., 1,,.,
'


_. i......_


~ I , ,,•
·(
-
,"_"'. ==---~7~
,, . ~- . •.
~I---,_,,,,._,,__,_.,,.__ = - - - -.~,_,,=~=!
. .. ,r• ,""":,"""~_,.,_\,·="'""9"==--1'"'!!,•Fi-,:
'
i!. '"!"
,


, t


r
j
-,


r-


�11
. ,..,..
,... -
i:I,
.. ..'?.l:l::::?.
.... -- .--·- •·.-..
...., . .5 _ __
.
.
·---- !'i!.. . . ...
h ... .. .
,·::::::s: .._ . __ ._ ·. __ :£ ________ .. ·.._ _ _ :::,__.- ·L- __ __tz
i
.,
.,,
..
/
-i ~
•1:
I·.
I
~
·-... · ---- ·- - ---
.,.
~
.,


.• l '


\
i .'
..: .
I
I
'j
i(
f;f


1


·:
' .
..
a - __~,_rrz ·--~--- ·
c . ·_
J
· !··...
... -
a s' · _ :
'i
.; ~ ' '


~


... .: . ...... - ·
,
~
I '
!•
•
•
Property Tax Support
1
The question arises as to whether or not the entire local government
cqmmi tment to ~TA piight not be handled by new millage levies . on property • .
The bond _people say that pledges of millage backing ·will be necessary anyway in order to .mal<e the MARTA bonds saleable, even if the actual funds to
MARTA came from other sources or out of e·ach local government's general fund.
Moreover, studies indicate that Metropolitan Atlanta's property tax burden
is not high compar·ed with other areas. In 1964-65, Metropolitan Atlanta 1 s
per capita property tax burden was one of the lowest ·in the nation. In that
year Atlanta ranked 33rd out of the 38 largest metropolitan areas ·in per ,
capita revenue to local governments from ·property sources. The median per
capita load of all the a:reas was 36 percent great~r· than Atlanta's. (A
comparison of the :importance of the property tax : in the 38 metropolitan
. . :_.. · areas is shown in Apprndix Tab le A.) .
.
'
'I
\
·:
..
' '
.. .
~
. •/
-
r
' .,
i .
I
I
I
!
I
... ,·
I
I'
- .. f
T
...
'··
· ,,
•
! '•
I
.. j
·I
'I
!
.. ·,_ .. availability of Federal funds . .
/.
~





I
I
I
•i
/ .:
.;·-·_......
ll·


,-, ,.,.:••


·:·, .
l
. ., r·. ..,
·": .,., ,,
/


/


·'
J ,
.
--·
': ..
I ,':" ,
/
•:
.. ' ,·.., .. .
,;
...
I:
•
·!
.•
'
I
•
l
.•
.
·;
•
••
'
.·.
i
.. ... . . - i
I
l





•
I
'
I.
j
'·
. . . , .' . ·,
•,
. .; .


1 .


I
·' -·
'
'
\,/
'•
"
...·.," ' /'·/.'
. ·:.
11
. (
'
'
I•
.'
'
\
. ~-.
. :•
!"j
~·;
,.,
,. I..
- I
~
·l
,,' .
I!.
I,
.I
·.
•I,. ,
t,
l'.:.Ai. .'-
!ii'
,
I'
~
• -~
...
,..
i
/
'l


, ;


.
.,
.,. ,
'
· . ·;
..
·..,...,
. ' '
.· ...:,.,...;. __
I
·,·
I
': ~
· ·
The millage rates that would be required to produce the necessary MARTA '·
support for the 30-mile system is shown for each .government in Table 6 at


.


the top of the following page . These rates are based on the recommended
schedule of government.al p·ayments to · MARTA given earlier in Table 4, which
calls for some . advance payments · at a beginning 2-mill rate in Atlanta
and DeKalb and a beginning
1. 3-mill r_a te in ·Fulton,
.
.
~-
·\ ·..'
· ,·,.,
. I
I ,
.
\ . 1
' '.
1j
1:11
·.
'··
--; -~).-,-· -----.m===""""--..,..,,= -.,,;.,.._,.....,,..,..==~.t,.,,
~
r
· · ..
,,
I
(
•
•.
M'fl----.---------...----~--~. ·1· , ~· ~
~ •
...,
.,.-==""--=""""-=-=""'*'""'=-=-==·
·rl'l
,\_.T.·
·'t
. ;
.
I
.I
. In any event, the basic 30-mile rapid transit' system . in Metropolitan
Atlanta could b.e financed locally entire'ly by properly taxes at a tax rate
that would not exceed 3.0 mills ($3 per thousand of assessed value) in ,.
Atlanta, 2.8 mills in DeKalb and 1.9 mills in Fulton. These millage ceilings ·
could .,be stayed within if some advance payments are made to MARTA from the·
governments, as,mentioned earlier . It is assumed here that the local cost
· : _would be $199,000,000 plus interest, as set forth e'a riier, _with what ~ight
i be conservatively regarded as a minimum assumption with respect to .the
I
f
.:
�- ---- ------·- ------ ·---------- _
__
__._
._,,----·--~-- - ~-••
- - - -~- -- - ---- -·"- --- r ..
I
. ' .· .J'
. ·:: ·
... . : ..
•
I
' •.
': !
..
,, •
I
•
,.
•
• '


'


'
.~
I •
.r _..
... . :
•j .
i ~ : \ ..
i
···,
,,!
.. 1· '
,:
. .i
.. :
I
_Table 6;
~
1 ~-
.. l t·
4
.
!
1: .
'
(", .


~


.
..tf~~-:'... _:.--~--
.
'
.
·.-.;- .. · Millage· Rate
Atlanta
Fulton
DeKalb
. .,
·1969
1970
1971
1972
1973,
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
.,.1982
1983
et seq
.
ll ' .
1,
' ,.
., t.
i[
• i
·- .·
MILLAGE RATES AND RESIDENTIAL CHARGES FOR
FINANCING 30-MILE SYS'rEM BY PROPERTY TAX ·
\ ,
J ~--.
.,
.
' ,
i
l, · .: .
. ·,
,,
..
)
!.
·\





I ~-
!'
I
Ir ,.
.•
I
1,3
2.0
2:0
1. 2
3.0 .
1,9


·· 1.8 ' .


3,0
3.o :
1,8
'
3,0 i .
J.8
1,8 ·. ·
3_.o , ,
3,0,'
1. 7
1,7
3.0
3.0 ·
1. 7
· , 3.0
1.6
'~ . 3.0
1.6
3.0 ·
1.5
·_1.5 ·· .·
3,0


, 1.5


3,0
I
Cost on $20,000 Residence
Atlanta
Fulton
DeKalb
2.0
'·
1.9
2,8
2.7
2.6·
2. 5:
2,4_·
2,3 .
2,2: ·; .· ,
2. 2
·,
2. 1 · · .• ·
2,0 ·
2,0
1.9
1,8
$12 .. 00
$ 7,80
12,00
7.20
15 . 00
9.00
15.00
9.00
.18.00
10.80
18 00 · ,; 10,80
18:oo.. · 10,80
18.00
10.20
18.00
10 ·.. 20
· 18. 00 \
10._20
18. 00 .'
9.60
18.00
9,6.0
9,00 .
18.00
9 ,00
18,00
9,00
18,00
.'


\' . .


•,. .
. .' . .. :
.I
..


, .


.
' '
-· •
.
•
J. ' • '
·,
.
... , ...
. ,
I
.1'
' $12 .oo ·._ •,
_:.ll.40
13,80 '
. ; 13, 20
\
.• 15,60
'..,i,15,00
/, 14,40 ,,: ·
. ·:· 13-,80 ' · .


· 13,20

· 13. 20


. •.·
.·.12 ,60
~t
12.00
~'12.00
, ll ,40
· )0.80
• •
'
..
'•
J•
~~
J
...
, ,.- ,
.
·t
. ..
~
. . . : ·.• • . . .



 :,




•
r . : .' . ·..
r'
.
.


.


.'
As noted in Table 4 earlier, th·e ·a ctual requiiements drop off after
..--" 1983 to follow a level course to the bond retirement .'d ates. · The millage
rate requirements, of course, could: be· adjusted downward as the··tax ~igests
conttnue to go up MARTA requi rements remain steady •
'
.,
-:
'.
.
It shoul d also be noted tha t the mi H ages would have to go cons_iderably
· b eyond the c ei lings showed i n Table 6 i f the heav i er ear lier payments to
MARTA are not made . If the governments simply pay into MARTA what _is
actually needed to amorti z~ ·the bonds ,i n the earl y years, Atlanta's millage
rate would go above four in the later years and the· rates of the other t 'wo
\· gover nments would be proporti_o na te l y h_igher a lso .
'I
• I
. ·I
.
·•.
...
,···
..,... . .
.
.
..
··.,:
~
I
I ·
1.
!
, Cur t ai lment o f Federal· Funds. The · ques t i on now arises: What h appens
if t he second $5 0. 000, 000 of Federa l funds does. not b e come a vaUabl e aft er
t h e first two-year commitment in t he ' s ame amount?
.
~
.- lI
I
I
t•
I
.
· The answer is ·tha t a decis i on can b e ma de (pre sumably · in 1970 when th e
fa c ts are known) to bui ld a · s ma ll e·r sys t em tha n t h e 30-mile sys tem, if i t
' is assumed that the ceiling on local funds woul d b e he ld at the previ ou s ly
established levels . . The ·engineers hav e designed a 21- mile " operat i onal"
s ys tem that c an be maintained without a current operating . deficit. It ·
would cost $276, 000 ,·000 ; only $56, 000 , 000 less . than t h e 3~- mile system.
.I
l
t'
. !
(
.. I
II
I
.

r··
r
!
I
. I
.
'
j
i-'
. ~..'
') \
• I
.
...
. ,
I ,
• ,
. ·u
..
I


· ..13.,.


)I
.-1
.~ ·.,. ..,


,,-·. .-·. . ,1----------.-...--------~~--\~---..,1111'1'---...,,~


n· -~ ~·r:iai ..M--------=-'!""===-,,.---'
,
..
-1
.
~- ~
'··
., ,
·· q
. 1, 1 ·
~ ,f
-~., /
~
�•
1-t:-~-==-~-~~:.-..-~
- - ----~=::.=-=-=--=--=- ~ ========-:;:~-- - --·--========:-:==.. - - - - -- ~,
_
....,;c__ _
_
_
_
~--
.
!
., . :
-
i,
)
i
. .. . .
I


,


(
·: l
.:. •.ti: I '
,..
1:
. ·1I!
.
This 21-mile operational system would take the same amount of .local· .. , · :- ;" f~nds as the 30-,mi_l_e _system; assuming one-half as much available F.ederal
· rno_n ey:
. .. ·i ·
I


'.,~ti.\ ·(~;.



11 .


. •I ' .
. i ;.
'I:
Local ·
' State
Federal
11; .
'
I
•
'
I f•
.._11


ll


i,
l !f
,. .
I ,}


I'


. :rt
Percent
.
$199
27
so
72,1%
· 10.0
17.9
$276
100.0%
• ;
·i
•
I~
..
•
·i ' ".. . .
':
~
,
'
· 1·
..
I
I





·~
.


·


. .::,,.
.. ,··.
.'
. !
-' '
JH
l it.


' ,,if


Toob, 000) :.
/.
i
,,
l
Amount
.~ .
,; : .
. From the staridpo~nt of e_ngineeri_n g, the 21_,.mile operational system


' ·.· could be built in six/ years instead of e_ight. However, 
inasmuch as the


same volume of local funds would be required to finance this system as to
· ., -~
finance the 30-mile system, the local financi_ng woul,d have to extend over
.
the eight-year period if ceilings on individual government outlays are to A .:.J.-:
. be maintained. A delay in construction could result in h_ighe_r costs
partly offset by interest earned on advance payments_held in
. .
' · . •.
.·.:i
whicJ
hor;',_/
P(
-
.' 143.215.248.55!tbe
· :1
'! i
'i!
· I,
,' ,
o\ . ·_:. . -
I'
/
Ii
.
. ,
'
'I. •
Prospects for Full srstem
·11
,,, _,
., ·
•'.
The full 52-mile system that · the · engineers hav~ designed would. cost .
$479,000,000 and take 12 years to ~uild (with completion set for 1981).
It would reach deep into Clayton and Gwinnett counties and would have a
considerably broder cover_a ge of th·e Atlanta-Fulton-DeKalb c1-rea.
i I!
i~
I,
1.
Assuming that the 30-mile system is well underway _with $100,'000,000
in Federal funds available, how much additional Federal money would be
required to move directly into the 52-mile program without greatly increasing the local outlay (in total or on an ·annual basisY? If in 1972
or 1973 it would become clear that another ·$S0,000,000 in Federal funds
would be made available, this would not be enough to support,_the 52-mile
total system without a heavy increase .in the local load, With the Federal
government at $150,000,000 and the state at $48,000,000 (10 percent of
·the total) , the local share would be $281,000 ,.000 -- considerably above
the "ceiling" set. _at the beginni:ng for local financing .
. - "'
. ' i'
,:J
,' 11
.l
'I
,.
'
'
.. >.__ I
. . .
',1 '
.-. .I
·i
1:
.I!
.i
I
/


1


•f
If in 1972 o~ 1973 it becomes clear that as much :a:s $200,000,000
in tota_l Federal funds might be made available - - an additional · ·
$100,000 over and above 'the same amount al_re'ady plowed into the · 30 ....'!lile
I
·,.·
• I
.,,I
I
. !.
i
I
,, j .
·,
,I,
,,
•
/ •
. ·. ' ..
-., t
!
.
Q.;
)I
• .
• .
• '
• I
.,
"
f ;,}
.
~
I: • , •
~··. . .
·'
.
.
..' .
I
•
�-·· ----·..-• -··-· ·....... ·---··----- ..L.,+. . . . ,__..,__...... _,i. .. ----·-·-····--··-----------.i..:.-.. . . . . . __. ____
...,i..._ _
_
_


_.. _


_• _ _
_ __
· - -- - - - - - · -
·I
. :1
I
•
....


,.


·.: !\
,I
I
I
d
lr
··I
I-
ii
'!
ii·
!1
'
"
~
•
\
.<,:··
.. .,.
I
,:
I .'
..
'.
,, , ,


I


,I


l




i




.,.i
I


i


,l
.•
I
i
l ..
·Percent
$231
48.2%
-10 .o
41.8
Local
State
Federal
I
.. l
, ,··· .'
,•
·, Amount
(000,000)
-48
200 ·
$479
i
. 1·
ii
I:
' 1
. . ·, I , ,
\
ii
·I f
if
,, ..,
·, . . system -- the loca\ share would n?t be ~uch greater -for the S2~mile system
. \. than for the 30-mile srstem ·, Her.e i~ / :the overall breakdown:
. I ,
.J[
~
,.
I,
I
' ··
..., 1 ,
.·. ,....
.~ ..,.I
i'
I
I
100.0%
.,
I
I
This is not an improbable assumption if Federal funds ever do break
· loose on a larger scale than at present, Indeed, it - is presently estimated in Wasllington _that $500,000,000 a year will be needed on a regular
basis to,,mee"t ·u .s; metropolitan transit needs rather than the $200·,000,000
level currently projected for the 1969 and 1970 fiscal years . . MARTA's
share in 1973 and thereafter could run as high as $50,000 or $60,000,000
a year.
!.
At any rate, the -availability of $200,000,000 in Federal funds could
swing the 52-mile system with an overall outlay for the three central
._ governments only slightly higher than the 30-mile requirement. · The point
. ·:· i s that all five local governments would now share the totals, · with the
following distri_bution of the .. burden based on the· fonnula presented
earlier:
.
·
~
'
·
.
·v
,
30-Mile
System
(0'00,000)
· i i. .
-!
· ·.
. •.. : . • .
,··
I
J / .
I
I
I
I
I
•·
· 11e
System
(000,00Q)
!' .
l
. :-, ' ·.
_._
City of Atlanta
·. Fulton County
DeKalb County
Clayton County
· · Gw_innett County
It
itL
.!:ii
$124 . 2
26 .3
48. 5
___
$ 199.0
11
Ii,f
ii
..
i;


,


!:
,,ll
11
.,
r
·f
li
$130. 7 .
. : . _.. ,.,. .
,


. 27. 7 , ._. . ·· ·..


, 51 .1
··
'-···:-·
13 .6
7. 9 .
-:
...
'
$231.0 .
I
It · i s assumed on a pre liminary basis th a t the 51 --mile system would
ca ll for at lea st seven MARTA bond issues compared \,ii th the six that
· might be s cheduled for the 30-mile system (s e e Table 2, earlier). The
carryi ng charges will be high er, of course , but five governments wil l be
picking up t h e tab .
•
J
In Table 7 on t h e next page, t he bond i s sue and car:'-'Yi.ng : ch~rge ·
- schedules of the two s yst ems ·are comp ar e d ,
.
.
)
I
'-~
(
"
·,,'
l,
\
'··
,,
I
i
·J .


. I- . °""


..
---··-·___..,..._,_______,--,



I ,,• ~--




V
""I .,,,-M!j\. -fI ,
r,;:,,
•
~
f
<
.
I
'
.. I
5 ~ •
~
I t, •
1
•, ·, . ' i '
'
' -1
I
.:
I
�.
_ _____~- ---------.-. --------------------,-,-
- - -- - - --...--"""""....,.._,,..,..,.
.;~
I:: L
.
...


i



I·


I
I
'
~.·
..
..-·
~
,.
.. .··
\
1.
.,
I .
•
• •• ••
••









..
1,.





.•
t
.
-:
.. ;
.,i ·.,.
..
... ,
I
,· .
· I
I
!
I
..
!I
Ir·
· 1 :-
11


' l-t-


. :
~
'.. ,1
,,
'•








i'
'
'
~ •
.
i:
.. ,
,' et seq .- ,
,
l
,•
.... .
•


'[


,
' :..
J
I• ,
1, , .
i'
1 ; ..
$231~000
,
!
/
I• •
/
.:•
·....
...
~
/ : .
.
,.
.:.,-... ...
·...·: .,
.
'.
. ,·
,•
'
~
! ~' ..
~;:_,
· t'
\
..
-·
. . '·"·
\
..
, •
.
·- .,.-
9,488
..-
'
..
,, . . '
12,408
I ..
., ,., .
11,920 .. r . .··
·, 14,110 \
,· ~ 15,155
15,iSS
,:
15,155
14,667 ]:.l.·
. ... ..
.
I
,.
'- ·
_/
"t
.
'. ' I
ii ..
.I .


,,:I


.
..:; .
'
. ~
ii
J
I .
·.
..
'





· . . - .~ ' .
l
..
'
.·
. ;i·
,-


•,


, . '
,-:
...
· i j1 .


.I


.
'} .
. ' 1
6,995
9,915
Drops to $14,301,000 in 1984 .and'levels
off at $14,045 ; 000 in -198~
.Y
.
1'; .
I





The r eason for the lower · local --requirements for the 51-mile system in
the 1973-76 period, of course, is the proj ected availability of
$100,000,000 more in Federal . money. _This fact, plus the sharing 0£. the
local cost by five instead ·o f three ·governments, would produce an actually
lower demand upon Atlanta, Fulton ,and -DeKalb. 'for the larger·. system in a
,· number of years •
·
·
I
,. ~ I
~
··:
.. ..


.. \ ;,


\ , ..
. i'.I
.!
~
I
·:1i


_! I


·;!I
.
·
' $199,000
.!.
6,995
8;030
7,725
11 ;·375
· 40,000
13,138
· 40,000 ,. ...... 13,795
13,185;
13,185'
30,000
12,575
.21 000 · '
- 12,209
12,099
12,09_9
I
.
~
I





. . . . 40,000


1983


. . .' ,


j


'
I
3s,ooo :
1'i_ 1 •
' . 1·
Ii'·--,, _
'
$ _25,000
I•
'
r' .
'
Carrying Changes
30-Mile
51-Mil&
, /.. .·.. ,.
. $. 1,825
$ -1,825
.. '
1,825
1,825 '.
I
..
4:,380
4.380
..
.,
4,380
4,380 '
'.
1969
~
$ 2~.000 .
\·
1970
1971
35,000
·" . ,·.
. ....:· ,
1972


· 1973


· . · : 50 000 ·
.• ' • . .:."';\~
, .
1974
I ' •• ,,


·. -.·so ,ooo


1975
1976. · ·
' · 30,000
1977
19,000
1978 ·
·
j


..


1979 ,.
\ ..
.,.
i 1980
.· .. . __;-- 1981 _
.·· : 1982
• '
.I
I
COMPARISON OF LOCAL COSTS, 30~MILE AND
51-MILE SYSTEMS IN SEQUENCE
(000)
}·..l: \\<
·: :. Bond · Issues
".;3 0-Mile
51-Mile
· "





Table , 7_.
?•
. . : t , ·.. • :
t .-
I
i
i-
'
_


i.


.. .
l . i . i~
·,·


,


.li
__,
•
•
.
. -.
j
...
.
· . ·:
I
•





•





.~ ; '
' j ,


 :-'; .


'
...
~
.·..





.
\
f
.,
..
_'
'
.
. ·:(-.
·- -~·
'
.
! . ':· ·
.
I
. i:








.
.
· 1, I
·'
l
•• •





.
j


..


'•
...
·.·. :
,I
·;'





"
'f.. ' '_ ,;
•
l ..
l
"j
'! :
...., _;.·, ·;:,


)j,,.


·: . \
• ·,,


,


• • • ' .- •
I
'
I •
.
',
.,
I
·'·
\





.-
..
'!.
'i.





.•
·,


•


..





.
.
.•
,.. ··
/, . - ~- ·.: ..
,, .
,. .
I
...
. . .. 16 ..
,, I
l'
,,
\.
,' I
•, rt,
I•
1
1, 1
,·, s,
. ~-- C
'1. ··
'·-
�·f:- -~-- ------ -- --~---
1··
J
'
I
·!': '
....
.
..
.
(
l
,, ··... . .
,·
I
.. . .·.\
.
.~
~
'
/
~ ~l .
l;· .
.,
'


t . ' ~'


. :.
..
. . ...
The following table (Table. 8) compares the projected millage rate.
... , equi val en ts of. e·ach local government I s share of financi_ng the ·two ·p ro- -·.
'· :.. j e.cted -systems··:· . . · . . . ·
1
. '~
.
. -~-~. . ..·, . ··.:·. .
,·:
. . ~(-


.I:ji.


!
'
30-Mile System·Atlanta · Fulton DeKalb
r·-
11
.- 1
.,
I •
' !ii·
,,


i


,,
p
·j
. ,.
ii'
'
'
•- . i
I





Table 8,
,.
i
•.
'
, r ,,
' 1i:',·
'
•
I
.
. ' ,·
I
.
'
1969
· 2 .o
1970
2.0
. 3. 0
1971
.3,0
'· 1972 .
1973 3.0
3,0
1974
1975
3.0
3,0
1976
1977 . · 3.0
1978·/
3.0
3,0
1979
3,0
1980 . ;._
3,0
1981
3.0
1982 · ·,
1983 1. 3.0
_e t seq:
1. 3
' l'.2
l'.9


1.81


1.8
1.8
~.8
1. 7
1.7
l. 7
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5 .
J'
t-. )-
I
COMPAR TIVE MILLAGE RATES NEEDED TO
SUPPOR 30-MILE AND 52-MILE SYSTEMS
1/
2.0
], • 9
2.8
2.7
2,6
2.5
2.4
2.3
2. 2 ·.
2.2
•., 2 .1 ·
2.0
2.0 .
1.9
1.,8
Atlanta
2.0
. ..
2 .o
3,0
3,0
I
.
3,0
3,0
3.0
.--2 ,8 .
~ 2,8
. 2. 8
2,8
2.8
2,8
2.8
·: ':2., 8
\.
\
I
r
. I
52-Mile SystemY ·.
Fulton DeKalb Clayton _ Gwinnett
1.3
2.0
. 1.2
· 1.9
· 1.9 ',' .,/ 2.8
f,8 . 2.7
· 1.3
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.6
1,5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1,4
1.4
\ 2.6
,-
I
,"'~ • ·,
.(
•,
2',4
2.2
2,1
2.0
,2 ,0
-'1,9
. 1.8
' ·1 :8
1\ 7
·.1.5
1.4
·1.5 .
L4
1,4
.
1.5
-. ; .
1.-5~'.
.(.4 '


l'.4 ·.·····,. . 1,4


· l.4 . - 1.4
,,'. 1.4
1.4
· .:> 1·.4
1.4
.·1.4 '
1,4
1,5 ·.
1.5
1.5
1.5
\.
\'
r,.
/
y
I
I
('
'
From Table 6, Asstm1es $100, ooo, ooo· in
Federal an $33;000,000 in state funds,
2/ ,· Assumes $200,000;000 in Feder.a l and
$48,000,000 in sta·te funds_.
·,
1 '
\-


I



,,


.,::··.·
'I
. i.


_ I


t
!


/ '


r
I
..
·
.. ,
'I
I
• I
I
~
•
.;
'
...· . . .
I 2.. 5
"

. .· : . .· . .
I
All of the indicated millage rates· (or their equivalents) will drop
after 1983 -- for all governments. Bond service charges remain constknt
·and property digests continue to rise_. The actual dollar amounts J.nVolved
· in the 52-mile schedule are given in_Appendix Table C.
• l
Note on Clayton and Gwinnett. Until the decisi.on is made to go to the
51-mile. system, Clayton and Gwinnett counties would not be involved. In
order to keep a ceiling on the cost of the system to these governments even
'aftef they are brought into the picture (assumed to be in ·1973), their
participation -is c~lculated in a lower rate up to 1983 than their ultimate·
share of the total cost would indicate, This simply means a deferral of
the main impact on :these outlying governments until the system is actually
in operation -- and their tax. hase more able to handle t _he burden, Even so,
the· peak impact ~ou~d never exceed the l. 5 mills shown in Tab le 8.
A
.
·:. , ,.
HGS
. 7 / 19/67
\
.. ,I...
.
·:/
I
. ':.
I
.
·-
\,
•. \
\. ,
'
.
.: I
.·, .I
I
. I
I
I
I
..,
I.
I
I
,
�·- -
•I
.,!_' 1,. __.__,.,__, _ __, - · _, ~· ·- - · ' -·,_.-
·' , '
•
~
·,


,



I

i.,


..
I:
I
, •,,.
.


i


1
I
'
•
!UlVENlllf rROM PROPERTY TAXES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS,
TlllllTY-EIGll'i' LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS, 1964-65 ]j
.· App.e ndix Table A,
, ··
.. :
I
Metropolitan Aron
i
-1 .
$202.74
82.0%
68.6%
$199.39
69,8% I
46.5% .
$180.29
41.2%
56.1% ~· ·
'i


.,. 1


. ' $178.30
69.7%
46.8%
!


... .. .,- ··


80 1% I;_ . ; ..... ,,
' : .:·
,.


$178.29


.54. 2%
f
85. 6% ..
$176,86
60.0%
- I
' i
$176.03
73 6% :' : .·
47.5%
I
43.4%
·;
$169.67
. . \.


J' · ' 67. 7% :i'. ·


74.4% . .
$168. 92 .:· . .
. : ' 84.6% · ' \
·· 7 3 ·. 3 % ·.·.
. . . ~;. 52.1% .
· $156,14 '• ' · . .
r
75. 6% ·~ . ~ ' . . -~, . -.. ·. 49.0%
$155,90
. '.
75.1% "'; . . . <· ,
$154.08
59~1%
I
71.
9%
·
·
...
.





.
$143,58
·j
53.5%
.·1,
I
$143,24
72.9% · .· ·
56.7%
I
$141. 90
55.5%
73.4%
. '. ~· ' .
I
!
,_; ._,... . ·.' 71.2%
$140~04
49.6%
l
. . J·
. $136.89 . ·
~. 83.5% .. :· ·
62.1%
67~7%
40.7%
$132. 76 ·'
. I
·,:
$129.96
66,6%
39~4%
• I
•
$122,79
70. 1\
52.3%
. ' .
$119.88 ,.,,
56.7%
44.6%
$117,14 ' ·
. 60. 1% ·
46.1%
65.8% .
· 87 ,0%
.$116.19
.1
$113.65
71.5%
55.4%
111."
00
..
.





~
.
.
.
,.





.~
.
$
31.6~..
49.3%
$110.83 .: .. , .
71.8%
42.3%
$108,00
61. 09(°" .'
48.0%
$103,49
'53.9%
35.8%
$101. 48
58.8%
47 .9%
\I. .. .,
...
$101.40 .•. ,
62.0 %
50 , '8 %
$ 97. 77
·
,
67.9%
53.5%
$ 97 . 06
·:63 ', 4 %
45.2%
s· 95 , 5z ._:. , :.. .
59.6%43.7%
$ 94. 42 '
46.3%
59.8% '·· .
$ 87.61
49, 9% /
37.9%
i'
$ · 70 .28
4 7. 2% .
36.0%
I
$ 59,34
66.6%
. 41.6%
I
$ 44.75
38.6%
23.3%
I
'
·Aver.a ge
$129. 94
67.3%
48.6%


/


TI1ese are the areas .recorded as the mo st populous SMSA's in the nation by the· 1960·· :1
.:
Census of .Popul.ation, when each of them had Jt least 700,.000 ~nhabitants •· ,1. .
·:
Newark
.j ·
2
San Francisco
l
New York
3
·1,,
' I .!
4 .:
Los Angeles
'·
' . ' '
·' '
s ': Milwaukee
·.'.;, ·.\:_
Boston
6 '
,f-.


i


7 .·:
Anaheim .


't'


San Be'rnardino
8


'· ~


~: · Paterson
', . ·:t ..
10
Minneapolis-St. Paul : ·
i


it


11
nuffalo
I
,' :
Cleveland
12.
·'
Denver
,. 13 :
ii
'
14
'
Chicago
,·!.
15
Portland (Or~gon~Wash.)
16
Detroit
17 ,;' Indianapolis ·.. ·
jl
18
Rochester


·,'1·


19 .
San Diego.
·'·.;,
r · 20
Dayton
. ,,
·.
· 21 ·,'
Miami
22 · '· Cincinnati


j


23
Providence
' I'
24
Haus ton


\· .

. 25


Washington, . 0.C~ · . : .





1.',
·,J i. . ..
Baltimore
.:.


. 26


Kansas
City
·'
27
.•..' ,
28
Seattle
I
29
,, Philadelphia
1·
30 .
St . Louis
31
Dallas
.' :
32
Columbus (Ohio)
',
ATLANTA
•,,
I 33
Pittsburgh
! 34
.,
·1'
Tampa-St.
Petersburg
·,
Louisville ·
iI 37
San Ant onio
38
New Orleans
1
•,
I
'
•
• •
·> : .
~
'
I
Property Revenue
as Percent of
Revenue from l
All Sources 1
Property Revenue
as Percent of
Revenue from
Local Sources
Per Cn~itn Revenue
to Local Governments
from Prop9rty Sources
!
! Rnnk ·
\ .
\ .





e
••
l' I
• •.
,t ~
•
t.: '.!
..
r
I
1.
.
I
I
t •
·,
1
'
I
I
[' 1!
l/
·'·I
'I
I,
I
~ ..-:_··.
.
~
t ·
.
...
·. .
U.S. Bur eau of the Cen~us, Looai Goverrunent Finances in SeZeoted Me trop~t itan
Areas in 1964-651 Series G.P. - No.9. .
.
.
.'
Al_~::-::.
,.---==!!!!"
·•...•., •om:u.::.:.a:u::
'
··
--:::z:.::enn
·•
I
.
Source:
ii
..
I
·:;
w:r:zz!.S.£!
--- ----

·"-----
- - -- ----~-- - · · -
I
�.~ ---
1·-
,.'
1·
.,.
i
"
I





' .
J'
,_..
1·
..
,·
I
.
l '
~
'
..
'
' •
•:'-. ·- .i .
·, \
.
'
l
' !
I
Appendix Table. B.
l
i
il
. · I ',,
w·.
. ..
-~





~
,
ANNUAL. FUND REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS .-:
TO SUPPORT MARTA BONDS, 30-MILE BASIC SYSTEM ·
.· . .'
I
Federal funds
State funds :
Local funds
. •,;
.···:,
!
r •


,.


.. • . •
J
$100,000,000
33,000,000
199,000,000 . .
$332,000,000
i·


.


I
.
Citl of·.
Atlanta
.(000)
.. : ;
, . ·,· I ;
1969 ··.: ' ~:-'..
\ .
,.·. ·.
,it
.!
I
"'
.··
, •,
'
}
I
,·,
' j
.:
·-
,1
•\
.1
.'I
·I
I
~
.i
I
1 .
DeKalb
County ·
·(000)
•·;t.
r
.
. . '
•
~


•:


.
•
1970
1971
.. j •
1972
1973
\ · ·.
•
,· · •
1974
1975 ·I' • :
-. .
1976, ·
1977 . . ..
'
1978


'. ,


,..
1979 · ,
1
I
1980 ,
1981
1982
' ,· .
1983
1984
1985
1986-96 (11 years
'
@1985 rate)
. 83,050
17,567
'j 32,450
)'
1997
· 1,597
' 7,550
2., 950
.,·.
.. :, ~ ..-:1.. ' '
·:i ~ 1998
6,602 ' ' ...;;..,,.,'.. 1 , 396
2,581
• I
1999 · . · ,
·' 6,602 . . . 1,396
2,581
.
l, 116
2000 . ,
5·, 273
2, cr-62
1-,'.'·.
' 5,273
1,116
-2,062
2001 ·: . ~- ·
2002
3,376
1,320
) 714 _,.
. 714 · ,
2003 : · . :
3 ,'376
1,320 . ,,.
. 2004
.· '
1,479 ,. ' . .
313
579.
2005
342 ,
. 72
... - . ·. 133
.
I
t.
I
I
.I
~
I
I
l
I •
.
!.





I





.
..
I
I
\
.
,,
I
'
/
'
,l
.
'
' !
.·,'
·.· - '
'/
' . t
I
.. - 1·
... / ·. .
~
,·.
'·





. '
•I
I ...
!
·: : :
, i . ,,

·.'
·}
.
..l . '.
'.
•
'1
•
..
l
I
.·.t .
~---
I


.


•
•
'.'
I,\
• ~ •
. .:·:. :~ .
\.





.





.
I
... ' .
. 1'·
I ~'-,,
I.
-~-'·,
\
I
.
., .
I


, .


'• :
I
. $'.2,828
$· 598 . I.$ · l, 106 ,
.. . .
626 :
2,962 I' . .
·. 1,158
.


.-- \ ;


4,659 ' ....
986 . •. 1,822 '
.J .
4,884
.l, 033 .
1,910
~. ..
' 1,083 ;
5,121
2,004'
'...
. \ .,: .
5,373
1,137
2,101
5,643
1,194 .
2,206
5,922
1,253
2,314 . "· \..· •·
6,222
1,316,
2,434 ._ ... _· .
6,537 · ·
1,383
2,556
6,873
, l, 454
2,686
·l,527
7,221.
2,823
.7,596
1,607 ~.
2,979.
. ,, · ·' .
7~983
· 1,689 · . ... .·3 , 122 ·
_..
... ' .
·. · 8,400
·1, 777
3~284
7,825
1,655
3,060
. : 1: -~7,550
1,597
2,952
•.
.,_' :..
1'
.
~
( '
,I'





· Fulton
. County .
(000),
..
•
'
\
I ·.
.,
.
. ..





.'
• t • ~ ' •'
•
.
!
,.
I
t
l
'·
I
I
.f
'
I
I •
I
.
..
"'
I
~
'
•
I
I,
I
I,
I
·I'
I
I
I
··.:.· . :
I
J
--=~==~=-F'~•
.
f
\.
•.
r.-i...-=---=--~===-=·~
===;,=;,=~===-r."74
.: ~
. . 1;r
l,;:,j!,~. ",o;".Ws;'1r,
.
�.;
.·
.;_;_" . . :..;..·:•-.-_ . ;. ,. .., :. . .. . ;:~l. -= 143.215.248.55 16:50, 29 December 2017 (EST)h~


f; ~: - : ~


',\
' i
. i
,,
Appendix Table C,
l
ANNUAL -FUND REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
TO SUPPORT MARTA BONDS, 52-MILE TOTAL SYSTEM
i
fi:, '
.
Assumptions:
. . !.
. : ..l
l
.
,\ -
·, .
Federal funds
State funds
Loca l funds
..
$200,000,000
48,000,000
23'1 , 000, 000
!.
. $479,000,000
. 't
City of
Atlanta
(000)
.,
• f ~
" •. j
. ;
)
I'
,I
~
.!i
I
I
. !
.i
I
II
)I
'i
I
...
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986-96 (11 years
@1985 rate)
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
$ 2,828
2,962
Fulton.
0
~
DeKalb
Countl'.
(000)
Total
~
$ 4,532
4,659
4,884
5,121
5,373
5,643
5,527
5,807
6,101
6,415
6,740
7,090
7,451
7,840
7,923
7,781
4,746
7,467
7,867
8,661
9,100
9,577
9,440
9,942
10,475
11,037
11,631
12,270
13,005
13,727
14,301
14,045
85,591
7,781
6,940
6,940
5,761
5,761
4,412
4,412
3,065
3,065
1,719
1,719
708
708
18,073
1,643
1,465
1,465
1,216
1,216
932
932
647
647
363
363 '
149
149
33,528 .
3,048
. ___ 2, 718
2,718
2,256
2,256
1,728
1,728
1,200
1,200
672
672
277
277
288
312
340
371 ·
405
444
482
528
578
677
740 '
· 1,015
997
$
$~5 168
173 ;
194
212
231 .
254 '
275
302
330
387
423
586
575





I
·-
. ,. . '~I ·'..
-
.
1,158
1,822
1,910
2,004
2,101
2,206
2,161
2,271
2,385
2,508
2,635
2,772
2,919
3,066
3,103
' 3,048
'
.
Gwinnett
$ 1,106
n. ··
10,967
997 .
889
889
738
738
566
566
393
393
220
220
91
91
!
6,328
575
513
512
426
426
327
327
227 .
227
127
127
14,045
12,525
12,525
10,397
10,397
. 7,965
7,065
5,533
5,533
3,101
3,101
1,277
1,277
52
52
.'
·1
.'
I
-....





143.215.248.55
Clal'.ton
Countl'.
(000)
598
626
986
1,033
1,083
1,137
1,194
1,169
1,228
1,291
1,357
1,426
1,500
1,576
1,658
1,673
1,643 '
$
,.
I
I
.
i~





-'
~. -~· '!.
.
. ,..-.i .......... \___......... -- - : - · ·-
~
~





.
~
n-
.
I
�P·,: c l i ..,::.:,::::y
F1\.\NCI. '(~
AT~.\\TA'S
Rap i
an s i t A t hor:. ··y
.Ju y 3i , 1 6 7


-i A :'-1 ~1 E R , G


E E . ' .:: , -~ I L E R A S S O C I A T E S
\\'AS!iL GTO, ·- , TLA!'TA
230 Pcachtre- Str et ~ . E.
Atlar-ta , G~o 5 ~~ 30303
�-I~A::C:i:NG
'1 ;::
co:-:s':'~UCT_G,'
OF ATLA(T.-\' S RAPIJ T.,.'c,,S::.T SYSTE:,.
T:e c:::i ..:::::. cost
e :::· ir.2.c--:ce


..;..: -t


sys'.:



i




of ~eLopoli·c::i.


't:.:. ta'


rapi.
tra sit syste .. c:e:;:::: y
by £1.:1 s o· tained f _o!n so:.:rc~s be ond t .
...ar
bo:·.
ca;:i generate e . ough opera-:... · n g re r- nues to cove _ op rati:1g e--~
ar.


l $ E:S


ce ·ch · p:.irchase of the oasic rolling stock a.--:ci op ra-:: - !
in; e t..::.pr.: .·c.
b idges, statio, sand othc
le .,cnts of t e f::.xed inv stme t
in Metro"'1o· ::.·::an
_ 00 1 •
F
eral an
t e t ac>s,
For t e c apit::l co ·cs of t. e system, ho•.1 re _
·clanta must
to t . e locc:.
tte area
governmen·cs
to
C:.:-'~
stat~ sources .
u
T:.is is, of cours , norma .
Rapi
t ansit s stems a:::-1c: basicaLy u:.:o:..::.c
e,.te:c1):..·iscs CJ?crating public facilities comparable to str
perforrr.ir.g essc tial public services .
Alt;"cug
ts and sc .oo::.s
2..
t' ey a:-e unlil'e s·'r ets z.nc
s c· oo s in that they produce operating revenu · s, few sys te'.lls a _ e ab le to s:;_:iL
off er:.ot..(,,. .et returns to r:ia! e any substantial cont:..·ibut.:..o
the fixed. i. vcstP.ents .
to b::i.sic cos-cs
So; e syste.s do bett r t an ot·.e s but all s
.;Le
·..:,.e
cha acteristic of being public service enterprises that require direc . . . ::,u - ::.ic '
St.]por.: ~rt ey a e to ~cet public needs .
le islation that set u
0
loc::.i g0ver::l .. c ,-::s to
r,, etropoli ta..'11 At lan'.:a' s syste:il
G.
thori:::.:::-
a'·e funds available foT capital cos\:s i.1 two way-.
is ·co t.:ti::.izo the bonding capacity of eac:--, jt1risdiction, if sue,
.'.11 ... i:~.>:...:: ,



or the issuance of general oblig2.tion bo.1ds ,:i os




HA.:,\ .... !:R.ORCE, C:.:lll
procee-1.s ,:o
A AS
CCIA.i .. S
-
"'
... J. . C
...,_,,.:)
�/
(:':A.~--'-~ Io
7hc ot!:.e:r u:::-o·,ic.~ - : o--.:
land ac · isi tio, ~:-id c ons truc·.::io;i c os·cs .
sti?ul::t-3~ pay,n n s :Zro1 ·.::r.e -ocal gov e :..· _r.-.e _ts to ·che Am::. o:city ·::o cov :.- t:-1.
-..: "-'--~c:
cos~s o~ se _vicing beads~ ic
'.!
u::.2-
SSl!e.
is·o;i- _: b~ ge .,e ally class ed as _ev , t:e '.:lo,.ci.s ::,ecause t'
re v~:1ucs ? l e dg d fro . loca
I::1 -::~
fo::..lo·.·:ing sectio .,
c :::p it::l cost
The
1
_apia
of V.e
de:_ lying p
'-r;:.
~c
.:-:-iC
11
J,
.e::.·
secu_i·.::y ,:o'..-:c 02
t.S .
sp cts o= the local :°i:canci .g o-£ t:-.0
opolita...-1 . "i::la.. ·.::a ' s r .J.pid ·ca_ sits st .. w::. :!. :. be
xp~o:--d .
'"::.se to be rei te _ a t ed is th::t t' e public :: aturc o:: t: e
si·c c:1terprise c al s for t e uublic assl!.'11pti on of res- o:::.s::...,i :..ity
for pay::.ng fo
t he fixed inv est .ent .
T _is pr mise has al eady be ::1 c:c:::-1
ecogni::ed locally m d indeed was as sumed in the cre at ion of MARTA
t c l ·gi s lat ion providing for MART. ' s suppo:..··· an
o
d
J.T:.
ratior,s .
Questic~s and Principles
Three key qucstio s
, ed to be pa ticula ly hig lighted i
this ar.~lysis :
To i·J'. at extent c an the local c..rea coun-c 0:1 _inancia
help from E!ederal and s tate sources to suppler.1e t
·the funds that rr.ust be ade avail~ble from t
locel
government ?
After the local share is ·ete::.::ined, l m· shou1d th is
b· rden be ailocated among the ever al gover 1, .:;ntz.l
juris ictions within t e me·tropoli tan a ·e;:?
After this allocation is made en a fair and ~quitable
oasis, ·,1hat would be the potential ir.,pact of t· is new
2. pen it re commitment U?On the local gove . r.ents a_~d
t~xpayers?
- 2HAMMER
IJR .. ~P\ .. •SI~
RASS::;11. l ~,}
__
�t~at .:.La ~o: ·u~ject ~o precise co_ro o~atio~.
t:
amo,~
~
ci=le~
t governDe ,t 1 juris
~
tio~s
A::ocating t .e locai steL ?ulton, D -'.'n.lb, C2.a to. ,
ob co:.m ... ies (wit~ a nossiblc b_ca - out of the City o_
Atl::u.ta -!:
c::1 ·";
c co' 1ti s in whicl. it is loc,rce: ) - - c lls :..:o_
cvi ::.::-.'.; e
c.lyzing
gets
OL
t'
· e · pact or _a i
4
_ru sit finru ci g upo . the bu
e d:.. :..er n- local governrr.ents cal:i.s ,..o_ evaluation o
p _oblc1.s oi. acco.~1;0 ating additional
that a·e al~e
y unde r
First
th
prc.ct:.cc..:.
~it~in govcr . ent 1 stLuctur s
i an cial pressu- .
S::iecific answe s to eac' o
tis sectio~ .
=·. a:"h. · e~
c
for::-.Jla -c,:.::·c co. si 'c rs both benefits fro! , t. · Lansi t systc:;-i a
t'
ere
t es
ight b
questions will be provide
12.te.1. i ,
2n explorati~ c _ pri ciples invo v
1 .
orde~ to get age .eral pe _spective fo _ tr.e subsequent an lysis.
Fcdeo_d .:.::d State Assistance .
All of
nsi t
he r:1ajor rapi
t .,e U~ited States built up to the present time -- in Ne\l
·ys-cc:i:~
ark, Chic2go , P i:e -
cclphi~, Boston and Cleveland -- have been preponderantly ~inane d f~o~
revcnu~ sources, bot
public and pr·vatc .
i.
It has only been in
oc_:
cc rt 'C.:: _s
that the .~eC.:.or l government has developed a program o':f ass is tanc"" i. t:1is
f~eld
s~all.
~n~
t; e w.oJnt of Federal mo~ey invo ved to date h~s bee~ r~lat:..ve~y
Tte w.ost recent rapid transit syste, to get under ~onstructio,
3ay Are~ f pid Transit syst m (BART) in Sx1 Francisco - - is be:.ng al~os:
co.::Lj:..-.:·ce!y i:.n need fro:n state and local sources, 1vit'i ·c"he ·cu:-ren
F..-:c...:;1·2.:.. fu:-ids ::-...presenting a small Laction
0.1.
the tot:2.l costs
f:o,.. ::r.=
\,·: .i.c, :r.c.:
-3H~MMEA.OR!
NE.
t:R
Asr;c,;.1.T • .i
- -
1
�reach or.c
L1 0
C
s:s


.~~:.on collars) .


f143.215.248.55 ~
clearly r -s~
Gr. -~:.'.)
1
~:. ~~


s sou


the -oca l
Oc.>.. e r
-~
n ed o:: ::.. i.e ..
~
ooi .t oi
u·-:y
C
re a .
, ViJ.tUJ. lly .::i.11 u . . in...'1 gov :rnr.:ents
atio~al crisis .
0 ~
n r ve ,ues eac
yea ,
oc 1 goverr, e~ts.
su,p i s in most
arc cievelo?e~, there' as be
stc:. e gove:.-·m.:cn·cs fo _
=G
a;-.c..
itional r ver.u s
i c ea ing
Eve
e 1ands
as
c·d to tur
re o tn.::ni:-:g
ew l ocal r ev .u
tote F
.
C
_
so
ces j
a., i-:. .
lp .
It can b:::; ta<e, as a basic assu p tion t ·. rit ~et ropolitan
L:::r,si: syste:n ,ust -- and will
sources .
i:;,.
proolems are mult:plyi. g
n eds fr a
-
v.::il~bility of fu.ds.
p _odt.ci:,_; s:-...::rp i. e r .::i.ses
reve.u
,l
Urban popul t:o s a:-e growi g rap"d y, de~:::~·-


acto·s a e crea i g u pre cede~te


int e face of Ii ited
v. S .
ci c:.l p · ig' t of _;,_l'!1erica.71 cL::.es tas :-e:::c'..e
c fi
s e :-v:.ccs 2··e mourc -~i . g , c _i ical urb
all o.r t; e
i71 L,-.:
t l
ta's rap:.d
get some aid£ om both Federal and s~a~e
'":·.e primary responsibili y :or fina;-1c: g this sy tei , now v0r, c~---: -
r:ot. b.::: .:,hi:Zt d away from the local governments .
?~a..-. :Z0r t. e Metronoli tan
In developing a fi:-a:-_cia.:.
tl:mta s stem, t e app1·oach ~Lst be to
,.. os·c :.'.::;~:.istic possible estimate o
r:1
funds that c~m b1:: expected .Lrom F ,
1.:::.·,__
ar.d stc~0 swrces and then to test the foasi"'.)ili ty of pro ucing the r ... ::ir..:.r-. 6
fu;-.ds r·::.·o;:1 the local sources.
- 4fiA t ,r.,'.!R.GR!~.~
I
ER ASSO~ I"~ ' "
_ __
�r-~
c:....1. be
is no e •i 'c:::c e t. . · t su e:, f· :i!dS 2 ·c i:.~-:1::. C;r.t.
·, , 2.11
r_...-_1e p:rcS SUTC of
t: e
Vi -:;; ·c
. '[Lr;i
? de _·:..:i. I ·,-:cs fo:- ot:-:.cr urgen t u .. t., cl, u rc' lerr.s
s r
r.:2.\c i t :..:..-.:-0::ison:::b l e ·co 2 s s :..:.;:. • c..:::y l2..::gc scc.. ::. e avai:'.::..'.)ili t ·
o::: ~ ill: s.
Be -
c ause oi i~s heed sta r
assureci o f i t s
.2.:::-e of t:.
wi · s u 1"J l.1.;~. em: w' a
s r.e:c~ -- at
..::unds t .. ,,.-c do beco ..
is r2.i se
l oca ly ::at' .e:.
east in -t ·e ir...11 diat
avai- able b ·:: t . ese f-t:nd
·c:
p r esent t h
bas ic
ft.:tu .. c .
- to a s sistan ce irc~.1 the stc::.te, t>.e people o~ Georgia in !',;ove::-.'.)er l 6'"
app ove~ a c onstitutionc. l r.me
,.en·.: de c_ c.rinJ p1..;.bli c tr2.r s p or-::at i o:: to be an
"ess :atial gove:.-:1.. ental fun c tion
tax tio::: of t. e state
n
o-.:
a p b:.ic purpose for \.,:!:ic:l t~ e nu·:;
ay be exercised ar,d its public f..mcs e:x--pe
.c.e .,, .
Y,-,e
ar;-.en ment also p- ovi ded , how v er, t~ at t:1e S·cate of Geo:rg:ia shaL :-1ct n::-01::. de



-,ore




hai:. 10 percent o-: the t otal cos'.:: of a pub· ic t a_ spo:::-tatio;i sy te:.:,
~::-~ctly or indirectly .
ap:::,rc:,:n·iatio:1 to the
Subsequem:ly, 'cl
etropoli t an At · . ·ca syste
hc:.d been d0·termined a-rid before loc 1 fina.,cing
bee
G ner 1 Ass .. b :.y ;:-. c:.c:e 2.:--.
even bei re ·.:he ·.::o·.::a
cos-.:
or bui ldi. g t· e sy ·::e::. ::_:::
ass;__;_rc .


c:i.· )U:cposes of planning, it is reasonable to 2.ssune t'.at ·.:,:.::: S 2.-::.::: oi


Gcor6 i.'.l. :.ri 1 contrfoute 10 percent of the c~pital costs of ~1 ·crc·::.oli ::::-:
, . .::.~a-.;:u.'s systcr...
_)
It is quite possible, of cours , th:.t t. e le_;::.s .:..:
r:ot c:.A·~·n:ove contributions i:1 -::his "agni·~udc.
On :he othe...
1 ::-...:
•.:i:.l
a::-d, thc::c ::. · : -.- o
-5 HAMMER
OR
ENE . .,;,L ERAG~
._.1.:- ...
_ __
�inar.. c:..al
"J:
.r. . :::g
S . OU ld
ta
C
c!.S
Ai.loc,r.:i'"':, ..:C.:c.1g Lo cal J:.1:.:-j_sdictio.-,s .
of .-.. .~~,
1 -
c pi'. :al costs ··-l.
govern ..vi,·.:s is



e i:1 .:;2.c:· ju:r · s i ctio




t;;e p2;
will be ::-.ac.
and -
Ul
·
2.v.2.ilaole .
bl
,..
G3·::-:;:.·.:1::. ::.r.g
-- S,. Ot.:.:'..d
.. <--. ....
•N
ecicc :):,' vm:e
11:
0::1
·.:::1
o e.::.c' . of t\e
u::. ti
1at ly,
..
CCU!'Se,


1..

r. ·s




.:,,i::::c::.· o:-- not t'. .es
However , a fo:.:-,r.:.:12. :::1..!s t be cievis ed for making a ia::.r
lloc2.tion on t e bas is of 11nic: ···J:.is
e ci ion . ig 1t ce r:1.2.c.e: .
The o j cti ve s 01...:.ld be so far as pos sib e to base
sh.~re
-:::1 p:rop ortio.. of
c..i loca·..:cd
J~t e ..1..
~
., s ·;:
.j
a pr c...::11s e .
be .ef" ts t1 at t
sys ·cer.i wi 11 p~·ovi · e .



. cc:1t::.fy t:-.e ove al - ·i:rids of ben ii s ·.:: .:..t s ·c




ac'
j1...:.:-isC:ic·.:::..on' s
It is . ot
t.o
a s stem mig ,t p::oci ·ce;
·.: 1e
I
·0
··y:::o· :.e.....-. ::.s to C8 ·e:.:o1:i.ne . ow th se b r.e£::.·i::
l'!light be disLibu ed a..11d :-::eas~e ·
trop o ican area .
system , ...s bee , able to defi .e t · ese b
Up to nm·J , no rz.pi' La::sit
efi. ts in a.T'ly precise way on a:i c.. _ez. -
by- arc:a basis .
1." evi·e:ice o
a.:.·c:. is ;;:-...~::.sta.:·able .
_
3S
the over:dl va ue of :r-apid transit to a .. tropolit 2. .
The cos ts of movi g peop:;.e by t:.:-ansit is consic.e..1.c."oly
t;1;:.,1 by exprcssi-,ay .
Reductio, of highway £md s·;:reet traffic th:rnug:
r:,:.·01is::..c.- of t:-ansit facilities saves ti .. e fo-:.:- ::.n ·ivid ,als
e.'1
b si. sses
a.:.d ::.1c2.:1s ::.eavy savings in public c<?sts for maintenance of tra1 spo ta:io.
fr.c.:.::..it.:..c"'.
':..:1


'eu tax values ar


created a!ong r2.pid tra::,sit :;: ig ts - of - ;;:.y
':'orcr.::o, fo:- e: _;nple, approximately two-thirds 0£ t~1e net increase i:1
taxa:..,::..e v&.:..u "'.::.c::s over the past ten years have been created o,. p:-operti s
- 6HAMt.
OREE. C.SI
~R MSGOCIATL.,.
_ __
�Val 1 :::.blc l&.:ci is
t\e locai nouL ~atio~ i s i ,cre~sc
I~ss ned::.
a,
c ::. 0s8 - i, d: s it" , - ~- e i -~ case .
In ·!.o:..-·:: , " ..;e:.. ___ __ e..:..:ic::..c::: cy
cac:: ·u::-:..sdi c::. o .
· er.efi ts .:::nd :::.cv
Setti:-ig 0_c
, i: age-


.:i:: e


j ::i s di c t i on' s s uecifi c
each area, C:i~Ierent pat _onag
t2.X
of t . e
C::.i::
""ffere,
eve
ir,1 acts i ,. tem.s of bo'·h savings and
by a
c:._
es · - ·.: .. e
.
ere '"r
·1.-





~
e efi s, . o•v eve_, is
ren'· '.: rar-s i t mil ages i,1


..n· ~ial costs,


f=
valt: ·s, dirfe r -:-i-·-
ifie e~t
ct s o
can oe ar.;ued t hat each b r:efi t ·.:o c:. ju:-is2ict i on c~
ir..b:.. ::. ity .
The transit syste..
ay ger.e an; large ne ,1 t
b
arc
of= e ·.:
alues a::. ::g
~igh t · - o:.: - rny in the ce tral c i y but a·.: -: .. e s3...-r.e ~ime . a:ze poss:.~::.::: a
ditfusion of e_plo ,. ent c nters
may acc<;L:-ate gr wth i
n
popu~atioc toot e::- areas .
~he syste2
suburban a ·eas but ·t"1is can ere te vast neP C:e:-:i:::.r.cs


fo:- n:..:b :!.::.c services and fa ciEties as we . . l o.s new t a:~ values .


s y s t :n --: ..... tc. ce property off t .e tc:;_x rolls c:s ·,:e·:
A rapid t:-ans::..t
as add tax valu s, a..


..:


c.::r. .) v·.: c:: c .... _ly bli:;ht the n i ghbor ood as i:_e ll as c eate substantial n~; ·
c vi ronr. e:-.. ts .
.:. .,._, · 2 f · ct is t at rapid t:-cansit be:;:efits t e J:i..;~ropoli t ::...'1 :;.., _; i0r.




.s a






u
11:
c l-=- .
c...2'lc ·.:o
fa st - growin
~e~ ion t ~e siz e of Me t=op oli an Atl a . ta , il l
efficieatly wit: out a b a l2,c d t:rc.:r:spor~ation
~o ~
-
.
,.,__ ,1. _..,.
•'-
- 7H A ~~r..
A. O AE E
ti.
l~t R :.o so c 1A.T 1..J
- --
�)
-
,_... ...,


. .....


.L '-
ab-
1
c~
L
w :.ch ~cccss ri:y i_ c~u es rc.ui~ t:.ansi t ) ~ill


his sy ta


,._ a c::..rcuia-.: i on b:.:c::i1-drn:
uno. t .. e eco:::o:-:-,y o:: a par·::.:..cu2.a:::-
~u ::..-i sdic·ic:1
, a:1 s £0 _
serv:.c,c .
_,
tight internal linl· - ges wit _in -.::ie ,.ct:ronoli · an a _ca . ust
cul::.:.-::.y reco
izcd _
as .:. d:.:.·.:,;ct i .port
,:::
The efficien'c o:Jerc.tion or Downto•.·:n A'.:la::na, _o:.- exa;-::?le,
ce to all pa ·cs of ·;:;-..e mc'::ronoli ta..""J. region.
tio:::~ o~ tr. · s ce tral business dist ict ir. o
'_"':. e :::.::1c -
way o:. anothe:r .ave a c::..-i·cical
~c~
be~=--i~g up. every Jajor i, ustrial i:-v SD.an-.: .:..n the e:1.tire :rcJ::.c=,
h-se i . ~ustrial investme. ts in tu:r; su~)~'.)o:r·::: wide _y scatte:re
res· c


)~ff 1 -



1.·::::.,1- invest, ents.


Si;nilar _y but o.,
cc:-:-..::er iz.:
different sca _e, E!"::o...
211c



_,_
_ v rsity,




Con:..;;y Dapot, Pe chtree Industri _ Bc;.ilcvard, Loe~ he G . ircra t, ·,::_e:
·c ic.:-,·::a
t--'.:.1:1:..c::.p2.l Airport, t .e FaYJ11cr' s


-_·.:0~ -


pri
s a~
ark ct, Georgia Tee
institutions' ave regionul sig~:;_fica""l.c
and othe:.-
r'"'.3.j
reg3.rdless o
or
t~ ~r
locat::.o:::s .


 :,:-....-..,id t:.·ans · t syste :1 accentuates

.:Y~C;:-:-:2.::. L:,!~agcs in a


o:
SL..~:
2
yst



1 \·Ji thin




I
2n
etropoli tan a:.·ea .
irlcreases the c ~:::"ici r.c,
A forrau_a to a: ::.ocat e
0~
h.:i .::
the area, ttcre ,..01"'e, must be ·o~sed upon su:---:~
- 8Iii.MM
R
OR!':
.


1 .. 

R
A.::S.J-•




·.:::-:.;;
3 ~ -;
�, ..... ,,.
<-•'-
rcilec::e
in each ju:.·isC:ictio:1 1 s
.:::r"i:ic::.?2.t:.0-r:
.!...
tl:c a:re2. 9
oven:.::.l ccoTlc~i c
\•J i ·;:_::-,_ th sc types of r 12.tive r.c2.·ures, a fair aid eq itc:..bfo ::o:.T.l·..:::.2. ~o:-


112.oc::·.: in:; r:::p:.d -::ransi ·c cos.:s ca:1 be devised.


~:.e b<!.Sic assu."'."tJtio::: ~.,'.,;.St be
-::h:::t ·c.1e -:::..·.:.nsi'.: s ste . will he _:? rr.:::.-e possible ·:::,:e :'.:\.:11
er·:: · re c.rca' s notcr1tial .
wil:'.. b
e2::.i:2..::..or.. o: ·c· . e
The gro1-:'.:. :ind 1.:ell - bei 6 o~ =-2.ch j-:1:risc.::.c·-::::.0:-,
t::~ ces t r:.easure of its s a _e o
t e benefi.·:::s t' ct ·.:he sys ·.:
·:i!
pToduc s.
LJcal Fiscal Cav2.bilities .
As a pc.:::t of t!"tis .::12.lysis of c.::..p::. ta::.
f:..nancfr.g, a cor.,prehensi ve study 1,ias made of ·.: _e fisc:1: pro"'.:>::.c:-as o~ ·.::, c ::.c.::.::..l
govei..11..,e .. ts of
~
etropoli tan At lant:-1.
tc~ ti~i :~Jact of adding the bu de
The pu1.· pose vrn.s to cctc:.·r.,i:i.c ·c.: e po -
o~ t ' e r.c, .1 raDid ·.::-ansi t sys·ce::-. ·co
co~?~ex of ~,ub ;;.c services and faciliti.es 1·:1ich the local g vern.~..},:-;:
car::-y .
al_·e ady
T:·,is fiscal study involved fo:cecas ': s of operati:r.g rever..;__;0.; .::..::- 0:~:::, e•. -
di tu:::-es ::or each local gover. ment, analy · es of capital fund re ui:.·..:::: .:.:-. t




..::d






proj ec'cio::-.s of economic indexes on the b:::.sis of i11hich ·che avai12.bi:.i .:y c.Z
fu::ds fo:.· capital purposes rr.ig:--,t be
s~ima··ed.
T>.is sti.;;cy shoucd that every local gover.i.ment in MetrC>p o::.it.a.7 .' -:::.::r.·;:~
is ~.:v~ y un °8r financial pressure.
Like rr.unicip.:i.l a:i.d urbi:rn coLn·.:y
-9H A f,, l".1 ! R
G fi .. £ N E . S I L
R ;.
~ $
C : , .. T
~
..
_ __
�CJ.pit.:.:.:. 11(;8~5 fYO:i1 existing sct:~"'C CS o:..: J..""2V~I:'.l2 ..
i
-·
~·
1'.
1 2·.,,.,_
·,":-rc~o
f!
.._
1..,,__,i
•
capi -c::_ ::,uci_;e-.:s .
._)
· ~.._, _ (..L.L,_.
., ......,-a
f-c,c.
C-
-
,--r·
~- -.L
l.
0 0
c.. :_·
0 ..
_
·.-io~.
._._ -.s
~r
__
.-
2.T,C.S


i::o:.· r. ··1·1 SC:"/2.CC:S


bo'.·...
oper,··,...,·_0 -• • ._.2:
•
a::d
""'1,--l
~.-
7 .is · s ·.:n.:e d sp::. ~3 op:::.~..istic fo : r:ccas"i:s o:.2 ::utt:'!'c -:: -



.-::er ::.:;c .... t::v:::,.:;::.ditur s :for _c· :..bilita·.:::.o.




t~
c ..
~-C
re·cv loprr:e::-.t as w _:i. as
_v
so:..u~io::- of p~ ssing social p obl ~s .
... t can be as~U!'.1e , 1 o ·:ever, ~b:t ::-.e\1 so~::.-ccs a: --_~cv · ,ue t!i ... 1 :ie ::. .:.c
ne - ds t·
G:C
hav · .::.::. ... e::dy cec!I p _ojecte


 :..-.::-:0 gh ef:.:oi-'..:s ·co get . a


1
ar.d t.,~...-c :i.c ~-- voters Hill C.:.J:r:rrov
out ::..-~:i::.
ocu:i. s""l.::s ·::ax on·::io. fai ed -
r,is o::..·
2-967 Ger,,..._--:_ KSse::,b y, there is
• - 1
.:a.· \ ..__._~
receive favo abl
,:::..t
legis ... utive at~ nt·on in the
o .e of ·c:1e :1ew i:a.·
1c2.su::.-es .
l.:..:( .... :..f ·c:1.at t:1e ., ajor goverrnner:t:s will in 2.ddi·cion have -co increase p _op.:::-·cy
-10Ii A :.1 r.1
0 , G
~ k
E . 1l 1 .. E ;;
A Ci O C C I I, T ,. .,
---
�£
"' C.IJC':J0 .1.


z


·
. , ~ ,-·0.1.-
..,1,. ...
1
c·
•
.t.CC2. ....
1.....:.,--L..._1
ci ":ntl:
~~e
? ~op s :.~ion
~~
r VG7ablc vote
iSSU"S
.
o:: :.:-_. ;:z:_· .ci::g
t.
~t =a ::.d ~r~sit is ess ntia. _,
o. pa_ticipa~·on in
,..,.., r ...
.. , • ..;
1
~, ..:. ..L -
·:::h
broug,.t to
y stc:;i
B.::i.sic P _ emises of r.:,2.lys::.s
'fr.is ri::a::-:cia
2..,a ysi
is c once:..'71ed on::.y
four cc.l;;.·..::.3s o.c Fulto., De:'"lb, Cl::.yto.
_ L
do s not cove_ Cobb Cou, ty
2.•• d
\•!
w::. t l
t.
byte
e 2.r as e:rr..br::c
Gi;i,m t t (i. cuc:.r.g t· e C:.ty o:f
i c: is :iot :;;i:..-es ntly pa=ti c i:::, ....ting
i:-. t:.e .... .?-.':'A progra:i:.
·· ~1::..:..:,rzing t e financial i mpact upo, .
·.:>. e
re pective loca.::. i;cve:-::-_':!2--:.1:s
oi au:.._'-_._:-.::, ·~::.e r<,J.pid transit sy te:n in ~'ctrO)O ita.;7. Ac:12.!'lta
&.:"..
t .. i:.. c::..·) ...c · ·.:ies to· tL,derta ·e the progra ., ·..:' ..r: '-' basi c pre1 is s
1.
i::1 ev.:.:..i.l;__-:::.r.;; 1
, ve




0






n
Thet the =~jor share of t r.e f::.r.anc~al respo::1sibi ity
i, valved in building the sys· e::: uiil be ass·..i..1;ed by
t:.e local govcrni. ents, 11:ith a ·,ii ir.:~m de:?e- cience
upon fi ancial help f::-o., the ol!t:,ide;
--·H Ar:11,J(n,GR~EN
ILl!"R A~Oc:;
~
•• 5
_ __
�'":t1.:!t -'_:he m:.ni .. ~: -~~:.,.....;c·-
.::..:2. ~ . .:) ·.::-.. 2
co:~s\::.~uc·~::. o:i cf
a -c -~::.lc s s~e~ cn;~j:,,.; o~ 2.~_.:..e~::.r.z t~e majo:
-J:."!.:-·~
0£ t"~~ ._;oJ.ls s~·c lo~: :."'~n~
---·:an-- :..-c ::.:1 ·c}:c a:.... ec.;
":': ~t 2 o~i C.J' a:1d. p:.--o.;r~_: i-1il~ ·u~ ::.ciu:1::-.::..u -~h2.·~ ~\·::. ~ . .
p::.:ovid(., fc_ a. e :~·::.;;:1s::.o .. c.,~ -cL.s b;is::.c y tci to
S.2 -;,iles la'.:er if and 1!hc::: 2dC:.:..·;:i0n· l fu:1.C:s be c o~.,,.;
~vail~~ - e f=orn o~ - -oc al sources .
lo a
\·1i -::h a
ap:. c
~he -£ " .2.r:ci d
·- o pred::.ct
-:
g ove:rrur. .. ·::s
\·i::..:
ccr:.::: i
·c:·a::1 it syste i. ::o _ w.. ic' ·ch y wo:...::.
t:...b -- is bot;
,..,:.t'
ace ·racy



-ec:.sonc:.o::.e a:1




t · ense ves to :.,ave ~.ec:.d
p·c:c up the ~z.jor pa::.·t oE
ces a ry .
t is r.ot
ow much Fec.erc:.l no:·.2y : :.:;} ·c b e colile availab::.e,
t:1e st2.·.:e f:..:.nds .'.:re ... i mi ' ed to a f1·actio. o::i:: t::e -.:o:=a::. cost .
t::.ca:i. ·y p::iss::. ::..c t .at t
syst;:;11 c c...i : . d ev.::::-::.-c• a!ly
c r-;:2.i. tics :...s -::.o whc
ovc~, u.
ck.:'.' ·:i:--.!SC
10 - t'
oe
ir s o
sue
u::.·.:kn :..oca lly .
a~e ;; -:::-:::.vsc: :i..-:. -
fu'":ds rr.ig: t be . .__cc avo.i _c:.·.:,!e i~ at
t rcgulatio s
cdera:.. :.:un s c a,, be c
uJ
2.::.::. .


-.o::c -


i·c -::. ed fo_ o,.:..y ·,:,,:o


,:c: t ropo lit a ..


This r:ieans taking so:n..; reasonable assurmtion ab--:.:·.: ·.:h
c1c..·::.'""::,:.:i-::.y o:..· Fecieral and state f, <ls but at t:e sa-ne t i e ass· i 6 -::. :-:..0
cc.;istr...1c·.:io 1
T~.is · s
. . , . s.
u-:
-.:r.~
d
~-:r.?o·.::.e -
It i
.:or by Fed8ra::. ~unds bu~ thei·
pai
c"-.
t he cos'.: of Atla..71·;:.:.:- s Yapid t1· ans::.·c
I'.: would therc~ore seer. i cpe:c ...tive, n


~
-i~


oss::.b:e
t 1 e syst :n t :::-ough a
way in whi c
,e avy local cc::-,:. i"t:ment.
·c:ie operati. g rapid transit s 'St . s .:..n
. ave bee,1 bui l' .
On t.e other ho.nd, the existen c e of
~,..,,- ..,..,,.,,- ' is itself testic:o .y to a clec.:;..· 1~ecog::i·.:ion that n-"w ra-ai ·
,_. _e:.\_. . : P
- .LUo-'-,.. ..
-1 2H i\ ,,1 .. f !'1 . Ci A i E U
. 0 I 1. S A:
A
~
0
~ t
4 ';
~
•
~
�~-
I
o~ 1:!ely
o be b



r.




l.
v
~oc:
_-. .:. ·-
.. . ·-:_.-..-
... .:. a ,..'.. c _c
ro.



. .




Cle.::.;: l y r.,2·.: -
--- . .J
\..I _
·01.1
.. . .
rapici -~ -
.
...,
.
_._ )
i.:r:po s i . l - · ::_ ·::t::::.:i · ::-. .
vas t e c 0:10.::::_c r e s cu __.::.s
~
at




P--!T






giv n -che
e


e ::.:... .:; t.


-,_"Y :' - :..o:.· _
5
... ..: , i
--C::. -
faci lit :. -
.1rea li s tic
'J


night even ·uc.::ly b


·..:, .. :.. ..
... a.c.~ ...v ...
.., ..
basis \lculc invite di s appoint c· -:. C....•
-
_ea iz~l --
~
d would also represcn~
pu'.:,: :. c :·.:::..s al:-c<l.dy put u po
'_"'. --.:::: seco..d p:.· emise
tr 2.n s :..-c
Jad:.. t!


r.:°J_


E;VC
~
ec~:.al
L
·..:'. .:;,·cug •.
-cr~,si
a co... it:::ent
-~f this !::op
C.
~::0::1 ·
ig' pdority '..:::.n:c ·:..
__,proval of t:: . . . _._;.,./1-.
he begin: . .:.:._; ·..:o a f~L--c::.::._
would als o appca:: uot: r3asonab :..e a~d n ......... -~.::ary .


..

-


~e:.s








...vc design d a 30 -mile system ttc.t cove:rs tr.e : ..., ...:.··;: oi t .c


-
:1,;,;::.·0 -


,:io:,s, the hi~i est densi· ies of devclopjr.e. t, : ::id the co_:..1id0:-s of h8 . :::::.2~·::
\10·--"" .. c"i.
"} ......... :}
- .......~ .


r.. :re '._:.e a:·ea


·cc .... . r
Q.
he~<..1-cr:. -
~:-c:1t2tio:1 ,:it:..,_ L .c basi~
~-..:: .
�soutf. ,
on
Cl y·..:v.--: ·---~ G1·:i:--.:-.ctt ~ow, ics .
u . -::il -
. s
2.


.-.:;sL.L: , it would . ot be ::J::' O".Jose~ t ,:::.t



... :.ess e ·ten - · ens .:1::: c :m::dc fror.i


t'.,::.: co:-. -·..::;_·;_:c::.0:1 gets u . c.c:-w y .:.n 1 69 .
-.::o co::.:, :.. ..;:tc
u
·.1
ic
woa
c
into t .
se 01..: l y L g
cc.,. r y t:-.c co:--.s-..: ::uct:.on p _ iod '· roug
ez.::s
l 77.
Tl e t:,::.::cd p::e. ise, wr1ic. re lat s -co ::·u:: :.::·e ex·::>ar.sions of
ad;:it::.o::al :·.0:.1 - lo c al fw
.:.r.c


i: ·..: is p:coj c-ced t o ·cc. 1 ·e


syst
~
LS
s becor::e avc!i:.r.ble, c:::.~ls :foy a flexible ::i..:~u:·.::
is
,.
I,..
L
fut
?e
ecis..:.0~ i::; m .. de to ;:iove ~.cad w· t'
ava:.la:::..lity of
edera
fr,e 30 - ile sys ·e:. 2.ssw. ::.ng i:1::..:r..i;::·..:.r.i



c:r::..l p :-·..::.~ipation, a ot er de ci.s:.on ca:1 be made later to




n:.::.c ""ys·..: ... (w:1ich would p s
0
o to the 52 -
r""pid ·;:.ta: sit lines int:o C:.c!yton ar1c. Gv.1 i:::1e·..:·.:
cour.tic) :.f suifi ci ci.t Fede:.·al fu.nds b co:r.c av.:1ifable to match ex ~---: e
loc2::.. :::.. .. cs.
L&ter, :.:Z and w .e. Cobb Cour. ·.:y C:.eci es '::o partici?ate ::..:: t:,'"



_nog:.·c.;..".. , t::0 C:ecision can be made to go to ·c, e 63 - mile ii·.re - c.o nty sys--.:e:-:




as fert~er iu.~cs
eco~e available.
As no·.:.~d earlier i, th.is report, the 52 -~nile system ,ould c s".:
$!.79,C
.,:,o ar,c \'/Ould ta!-cc 12 yec:.rs
to b;.!ild
w::. th
cC::'."'.)letion sc"hed::..::2
y
- 1~-K A i.1
r.,
!: 1
0 il i;:
ti C: • S I L i: ••
A .:; -,
i; f
~
•
<J
- - -
�:r(;su:. t
--
0~1
ya sl i gl1t
sider.-::s ol ti:c cl os8 - i
of cou~sa, ~o..1ld i . c lud
-'-
-
0 -·
_._;')
L. l .
c ouI,ti ·S, ~-..1:i.to:1 ~d De'.(2.lb .
( ,~- .. -.:;,.; S 2 -~·-. __- .....:=.
~ . "'·
yste~ ,
_ ""Tl_
e-tansio~s ~o -c\d hcsi c -;s t ara wi~ ::.,
~
e ·c.,o c oi..;.n -
I
I.
I
~i cs ::.s wc::.i. ::. 2s e .·tensi ns o· ·.::\:c::::.- d -co ·.:',e s1.:bur - • )
I
I
'_'o .s-:.z:_,:;2.::-i : e t r.e fo::-egoing, t h::.s 2r. a:;.y-is of f i nan ci:;.g 1.-:i :. l b~ co. cemed
I
I
I
b2.sic2. :. ~y wi-:: h t wo :::-ap i d t r i s i~ sys~eres:
'
I
The bG.sic 3O - mile syst · m w.:-,1c.1 1:ill cost $332,000,000,
0
O?er:itc 01 ly in ul ton c::nd D '.(2.:'.) counties, t~:(2 n::. .a
years t o buil , ar.d be finance:c'.. 0::1 the asst....s-r.-·Jtior, of
7!1i . ir,;u , Fede:;_~ ::. and -tc:tc as ·::.s·.:a~ce .
T.c ov"'rall 52 - .1i2.e system 1-lhich 1-- i::.1 c ost $47 ,OOO,OCu ,
c:- t e. d out into Clay·co:1 c::.. c G1,.:. ::ctt co-...:... ties, t2.:z0
· 2 yc2.rs to build, and be u~d rt2.!en b~yon t~c 30 - ~ · 1
systc as more ede:::-a- 1:io,1ey beco..cs available ·.:o
.atch state a.~d local f~~ds .
1
Allocation of Local Costs


'"r.e d.:,~er.:iincction of a f ormul.a


.~:ight be reco;:_. ~nded ::o_ 2._::.cc~·.::.n.;
·c:.c locc..l share of the capital costs of the ~.eti-opoli tru .A:.: k
'::.a :·::.,::..d
t1-.... r.si1: system among the local jurisdic·.:::.0:1s has involved 2. majo_
.;..:r·or · .
v:::.:.·.:.3<.:y
·-2s-::~:..-(::_
.v1cthods used in othc:c rnetropoiitan areas have be..;n studi..:.::.
ot
factors rc:ati g to potential ben1;ii.ts o :'.: r~piC: tra..--:..si ·.:: ·.::o
_;_~::ere:.:.: )arts of the met:::-opolitan area : ave been explore
-15 HAUMEA.Gri
1'15
Sl~iJ:i
t..,.,w.,
,.__ uid~
�2.::


f~c~c --s - -


e : ~ti V3
tive
i ..
C:evelopm
~~ : ative c a1acit
e ... si ty o-£ usc.2g
.., , _
_ ,L.
ncc<:;ssary - - ·co
to
ay ,
er.t i -
&!lG
~cla-
i . p:ict .
e ,.:Jlo1 ~,.-. ·!l-:: -- wo· ld , os t cle2:-ly _e::kc.:: t::.ese bc::.s · c co.. s:..deratio::-.s .
. ·o::.e
or t ·.ese :ractors by its · t wou · ·,rovic.e ·c:1e b si · .cor a fair a:-id ec...:i·"a'o e
cos·.: c._;_s·c:r:..· tio., a.i-:d '--
c
t.
T. se ~11-ce e' n -n-;:s ;_::;.v
allocatio·" forrr.ula .
a-.:i ·c::ce of a::-,y
\JO
,1 d pr "t:dice the fair.: -ss o.,_
the c::.d itio.
being simple r.d rr.casurable by b:isic date:. that can be r adily ob·ca::.r.e
1•.1e 11 cocu:-.!er.tcd and .:mt' e . ticat-::d
_':'we ac:
itional conside::-ations
+" o:;1


1 st be


int _oduced to as u ~
t .e i2.:.._ness
oy getting t.uo se-.:s of figures fo
a :'igure :for the present (usi g 1965 as ··!1e base y a
veri~::.e~) and a projected figure for a rutu:re year.
.1 -
071.e::.
· :-.g future as wel:i. ::is p:-esent pattens ::.r.to ..:.cc-:>.::-.-.:.
T:,is c.:.: be accorr.plishe
fo:r::;cr!sts
a::d
oL.:icial so rces .
a~a cqui-.::y of a Linal allocation fo ,ule utilizing t' ese factors .
L;e ::.::·.1,cr-::::.nce of t
of
o__ 2e::::-i ·.::
fo:.·
e3.cr. e~-::2.:::-:t
·1 ic.. ,L-::::i ca7l o.:::
!na:.,rr:uch as
--............
·- ...........__ _
\,,...
,-
e been made o~ bo·'--h population and e plo '::l~::t :Eo:- -~·:0 y.=-2.:·
10::;3 DY ·;: __ e At lant::i Rcgio::1 , ct:ronoli ·... n
~ann.:ng Co .tnission (in cc;,;:_ -::.:.0~
-leHAMMER
GREtNE
Sl~1;.~ J..S~~:
1,.·~ ..
_ __
�... - .... . . I.;'.
ar.d e:::n::.oy.:,c:::: :Zi::;_::cs ca. oc p:..·oj cc: .::.
juCg8r.: ... :-:t
f .::ctoJ..~s.
.1.0:..·
the
S;:.!T,e
3.Ssigr,i
TI is is
c:)
. ce to c~cl
_...,
o. e
'--··
It was det0r:::::.:-.ed t .::.·.: e::1p _oyme ·.:: s . ou::.c be give.
a.:.:.oc2.:cio.: :Eur:r.u:a .
l'.Y:!_'(;3.tes·..: 1:.r~::.~::·.::
year .
because
·- :r..o t
e~ly ::-ellccts the eco~o~ic st~ ~g~h
v::~::..c~s jurisdictio.s.
- -<J,
act:'..vi·..:y .
ef~- cient
e··pans ion o-!: its eco~o,:1y .


.;..:..-:;...;~·~ cap'--city to


'.'.'!:e p::-01~0~ 1:y -::a



..·::.:sit sy tc;, ,voi.:ld cone f:..·0::-: .. ....




.... .l. .\.,
' "he
area with t. e .cavi s~ a~p:cy-
inance it .
diges·c -- ·C:he c:.ssess c:. value of prop r ... y pu-:: c::: ::
oe .;ivc:: -:::,e ::-.3xt '.ighes -:: ,:0ig~ t (:2).
• ..... · -
acl-,
.• o.:.:,
.l ... ·-
...... ..&.. ....... \,... .... _,,
.... c
-17H ,., ,.~ ,.
f
n
F'l ~ ~
r. t
..1
I • ( R A S $ 0
c
i ... T ~ ;
---
�.
u
p
':.'C1.;1 ·::
oi l'·, ::r: -
v;:..lec .


01is.ula, pop· ::.atio:1 ucu:...d


In t1
'-----.1.
-~ - c::ns::.·.:
of Lansit r:.d-:.:-s .ip •:oi..!::.d probably not c a::::-y
rc:2--~i~ .. sh:p to p pul3.t :. on as pc:trc,;::.ge :.Z:, "
c .s it::..e:s n


1


~ .1
,L
~he tr::::-1s.:..t co __ ido:::- w.:.L ·c
le 1, fol l0\'1:ng,
st.:.t:.s·~:..c::l form i
s:.o·.-m
t>.:..::



,

.






~~
~o~
.;
t~e c ose-i
"1
~~
ore in·ce:i ·
ist:cibuticr:s nr.o:ri.g c.:.c:-_ of
--~--.. ~ yea::- (l 83) .
a present (1965) ar:c - .c.,
J..t,..,.L.L,._v



..llocation fo




~=-cas
ese three bt:;:,::.C fac'·o:::-s a:ce s ·:: fo::.-t. in
te~s o. pc~cc.-:t
cc ...':.,::.:-ics al 1 of -::.· . as
S[:..e
factors
la, v:hich.
·:::.c as., gn
t:. c



'o:.rr




,,...
. ne
~eig' ts beco .. es t~a
s also s:1own ir. ·cer;ns
0.1.
?TO -
·che pe:-cer:ta~c
s. ar~ o~ to-::.al c apita: cost ~- at wou d be al oc tcd to each ·u::.-is~ictic:-i .
- .LSHAMMER
URfCt,E
c:t~n
A,$30.:1 ..
_.,
---
I
�(
(
Tab ] e 1.
ELEi·,Jrl'!TS I N Izr c m1 ;r+: Ll 1] ) COST i [,J GCl•: no~~ Fo·:: . lJ.A FU!z M.1\ !ff/\ C(L',TRUCTlO,i : P[RCE!-ff
lJ IS'J'RlBUllON OF POl'UL1\'i lCL'., fll<Oi ·;i<.'I'~' 'J'AX J1Jl,L:S'f, /\NU 1.;t;;' LUY/,;f-:•i'J', _ 1905 an cl L u3
Popul a tion (1)
Actual-- Pro j cc-:;ced
County
1965
Fulton
De Ka lb
Cl ayton
G1~inn t t
Tot a l
Notes :
57 . g ,
31.1
6.7
5. 1
100 . O~;,
19 8 3
T: ,. Di ge st ( 2)
Acttiii}- P i·o:, ect e d
---nfGS-
50.5 %
6 3 .1 ~o
3 ,1 . 2
9.0
28 . '1
6.3
2.0
-nn::.-.;- 56 . l ~
31. 7
7.8
4 . t1
5. 6
1OO . O~o
100 . 0 1
Enn l orr,;cnt (3 )
/\ct ual
Pr o j c ctcd
106s
-- T0"f33 -
P1~_oscd
All ocation
Formula
78. %
72. 6 ~o
1 c; _3
'1 • ]
19. 2
5. 3
.:, . 9
]. 8
2.9
3 .3
66. 7%
74. 1
100. O"~
Rc l at j vc 1·;cigh 'Ls V!;Ul i n ~:r:ri ving at f urlf,~1 lr are shO\. 1 i11. prircn-;.,hc s_.s ,
Both 1965 2ncl 1983 figures arc 1:cightE-d "'cco::.. ,ti n[,J y . The p rop8: i.y 'L ax
d i ges t s 1:crc put on a co!112rab Jc bas i s f or c~c:h j uri sdiction (loos" of
rnarke i': v2.l uc ) .
- 10 -
�so· rc.::s.
All o:'.: ·.:::-.e ::. -::2.
sibiL.-~: · lor t11" ::i,;;.._ s rcs ·cs s ::.ely i.:i-::: -::'.1c cons l"c,rn-::.
Ir: '-- .,_ ocating the costs
cnti rely 1·:i .


.r:


th
2.ie
0~
bou .d -'- ics o: ~u.l :0:1 c...-:ci D :'alb coun ·.:: ies , it ,:oulc seer:1
i
e:iso~:i".; le
1..0
limi'.:: t c locul
spa. sib::. :'..i ty ::or
this syst ::-. to -::· .ese t ·.;o
,,I
I
jt::;:·1
dic'cions .
As soon as t e
.cull le ..,:.::: o:'.:" 52 :n· 1es, t .
-cisio::i. is n .:!de to extenC: ·.:he


,·s·.::c::i to i·.:s


pa::.·"Cici:::,a·.::ion of Cayto:1 an' Gwi . :1ctt c::,;.:.'1t:. s
wou=.d. be ass , cd and pr stu~ab ly i:h ·y 1.10u=.d b' .:isked to pay ·che s:-1a::c
tot:.:.::. syste;,1 c21lec. for in t e for:nula s;.o·.r:,
of t ,
r,c.ble 1, ir.c::t.:cin; ·c:-,~:
~l
p;:.:.··.:s o:f t::.c 30 - :nile basic syst ·.. v.'.'lc.se cc~·,s '.::!' c-cion
p:·o
. _,
\Jo· - '-
~ay before tteir ~in2ncial i volve~ent.
':1 .c bre~/ dow11 of fina. cial responsibii.ity between Fulton
cc,c.:. · es
~~c~o~
1
cor:nectio
ell'.·
C-..:: ·c.::i
with the 30 - r.1ile be.sic systen, bas
set forth in Table 1, woul
be ~s foi:owi:
Fulton County
D 'alb County
100.0%
HA.MMt:~ . GRtEtlE
Oli.~;:t:.$S0;.,,7.->
__
I
�.. ,._
ii 6 ur2s '.:: h~.·.:selv-.;s .


.. velJr


0 :1 ·..:::.~
0-:


s roo:-:-:


L. • •
o,in_:_o .. c1bout tl-_e
On bale." e, :10·.:c\1e::· , ·c::c.: fo:.:aul· '.'iOUl
.:!:~pear ·co GE:
o,~si s of i ll :.cse ::cb .
patro~~;e :.. 2vc!s us d by
"ilfe~cn: ju i srii ctio~


r.ent p:-ospec·.:s


2.::.0
g t ransit
r::.
0 •
t - o:: - ,-:.:i.y
elemen~s ::. s ! i ·ely -::o be hig· ly specui ~tiv8 .
a:
t~e
po:er.tia l
D
•
,-1
,
la . '- uCVC
•
_ Q') -
.:sur ~e , t oft. c


t~~ , it


A- tc r c on si dcrin~
\!as detc ::. ., ir.ed t . ;..t a sim le _ a d more -.:si::.y cloct.:..11c t.e
s t of rr.e .:.su:·c;:-,er:ts
would be no~c s.:i.-::i s fa c tory .
Financin~ -::he Bnsic Sy.Len
/.,_3 r..:. ...-c2.-...y
oted, the
0 - , ile :)asic sy -::e .. pi-onoscd 2.s the :-:1i::1i:.'~~
co, str-1ction. :)ror;rZJn fo-:::- Mctropo~i.ta:1 Atlanta v:ou::.d cost an csti .. ::i-.::c
$33:::,G8G , OCO -co build .
The full capital cost of -chis systerr. must co!i:2 :: _o-:-:
p-:::-c-;:~_-.:.::.c -!:. ·:·.ds -- that is, fun s not generated fr-om
r· pid -~~nsit system itself .
as note
t:
ope cit i o:'. o:: :::..;
earlier in ·c'1is
~c.r·:..y yca:..·s, t, c funds generated by the fa.re box ,._..ould not b,:;
. 1d._.:..~ .. :r:..c::.ng even ·
s .. all part of the b~sic co.pi t.::d cost .
C3.?2.°c ~2
c:.:-
Th ,. Ko;.;L..


i..:


s·.:o;: .. _.:.-.c '.:o ,.. .::i.,taL and i:·.1prove ·c:.e ~J-.y.:;ical syst ,J .
- 21HAM
~,I
UA[f
ES
l~~
A:iSti:
�i
I
-..-. r,.,.- .; ,.:
.i..(.,,..). J ..L.U.
s ·st . . ,: ::.s -:o ::1&'.ze
et
.._ _...,,. - - .: .,4
1,,, J,.~.1,.,J_
1,.,
S')Cci:Z::.c


.:-cce::.ve


u.t of
priatic:1.
ye.::.:::- to -n:rov::. c:e .'
·cio, Viill ;,ave to :rcc:.ch -:.:he level o~ a.t least ~S0J,000,000 pe
any s;.:')s·ca.r,~iG.l assistance to t e c:.t::..cs a .C: ,. ___,t:.o;)Olitan


.,i..:i::.-:.i:'.g o


ex:_)anci::.:1g t· eir rr.ass t:ra. si·c s;ster.1s.
tr. ;::.:
J.TCJ.S
2.T
The ::.n:cs ; se fisc::.l
nrcssu::-es cau ~e d by the Viet ~w,1 •.,:etr 2.nd ot. ei- .eavy de iands upon t·-:0 ?cccrai
t:.:-02.su:.ry, :-.oi;cve:;,_·, has r sul Led in a deferral of any prog:!.·a.T.,i:1g c:c t;.is
=t
I.



.s




r.opcfully antici;iated that func.s made availab::.e by Co;;.;::.·ess
lor 1.ass tr.::.nspo:rtation for the two fiscal yea::.·s beginnin
extc:-,c.:..:.; tirou 6r. June 30, 1970, would ue
y1;,;::..:·.
~
, ::.95S, 2:.c.
J._.::.y
c range of $200, 00,00, o~
Pros?ects appear fairly optir.. ::..stic at t; is stage .
l..> ...:-,g ·c:-.is '-stima·.:0 it m~ght :::oc:.sonably be assw;-ied that l--:. ~"· ...:oulc :.,,:.
,:,c.:;:.tiOj:
~o request ar.d receive
as $25,000,000 p r :·ec.:.· ::. • ·:::-..c
-22k
tt
M M E P. . 0 R E E ,i f: . S I l
R
S,,,
C
~
., ;
1
7 E


.'.J


-
�bec1: give~ in the rn o.nti~e :::.~
a basic 55J, ::;C,,000 in ·ede::::-2.l f
·::.~S



-.i~::_·,: . e




a i:".::.·-::.:-:-.L:.~ .
CCiUI'.teC. OT! 2.S
to assu:-,1e,
co;_:::.·s
al ::.o'::::'.c;: ts - '
. r.e
cs :-crr:ai::., i::
nrcse:--:c ::. ·vc
if Vi ·::: , '2.m o _


...nd i 70 i i seal ycc._ s.



.s


not unrco.son~blc
of a 1,,..,:..·opr· :.::.:io:1s fo:.· :uss tr;..nspo:.·t2.·::.ion '.'i 11 co:: i ,ue.
l:!:e .:. .. ·::c:."T.c.t.:..o .. c:.l si tu:i:tic.
clc :.·s 1.::::,, t· c:..·2 could be a sharp i::1c::-ec.s"" ir!
r.
~or~, ~heTC is pro~a ly li~"C
an
r.
_,_
"ii:t
c::c.T:cc t:::!'.: cu :.·e .-c levels of app:-opr::.c.tio:'
'cc.ere ::.s a goo
c'.-:a..7cc t 1at large out lJ.ys n ig. t beco.
oi 'c:.ese consider~tions, it would :::.ppear reaso, ·01.e to :::.:·.--::.ci -
.Ja·ce -c..:.t a:.: ::.02.st a..,other $50, OJO, 0C0 .. ig, '.: be obtai,,ed fro;n !-'eder:::.l
~
~:.·c.:..s lo-..· r,~:CA 1 s basic 30- .i~c syste.~;.
As a conscrvJ.tive O.:!Jpro:::.ch, t:.-
c.v~L~cili'.:1 cf .,;·oo,000,000 in Fed-.;::.-al ::unds ,.,ight be tc..ea :::.s
~c143.215.248.55
£isc~l plar~~ing.
'.:'.1is wou~d nrovicle co,.si<ler""):y :ess
-cr.et:.cc..:.. ',:,;;0-·.:hi cs o~ tot&l cos';: that t _(; Fedcra
govermr:ent r::ig;_-;:: t,3
.... x_:,t;.._,·.__"ci ·co p:;:-ovic3, bt:t it would be a subs ·: :antial con ·::r·but1.c:1.
upon th~ local area,
T::o2: .:1S;..:.:y
a realistic oc.sis ro::
5
--.-.....,-:.• --
.. J .... C-1,.--
0
-__. ...;-
n t.
M
r.; .:
1t •
oheE
· t:
o
1
~
E: R ,. ...... C:
c
1 "-
r _ ...
_ __
�! s c:.l::.·ca 'y note
·-: ~n


.c


-, i.;:..·ce.: ·c


ro::i:ri::n:ec. a st:..-:: o- $500,GCJ as


o::
3.
t .c cost o ·
~


occ:.1.


contr::..bution 2.~c::.. nst
-'h
L ••
or . t4T T .
Th· si..:'..)se-_~c . t avaiiabili ·y of '.:' .e s"C.:,.te mo:1ey, o_ c ou se, r2--cs -:-,tire -
ly wit143.215.248.55


.~;islatL:_e .


eas ~=ble to axp ct, ho~cvc _ , th~t
. ,. to con-.::::-ioute
·c.. e
o~ l-1c·... :..·c:?
b
It rnigh: be
·::.·::a..
·che vc.::e:..·.s.
AtlQP.ta's rapi
T. e u:recise
VJ
--L.1..\,.:;
h ~
,.,.est
full 10 pc:::-ce:rt
t:::::.··t syste: ... .:.: a .. d ii.en it
cn:n·o\·cc
1
y · . i·. r:iich d:.c ·c s:a· e funds might be :.:e:.d.,,
c .a::.r:-2ls o..:: sc;ne existing m.• ·.::hor :..ty, or ::..n ~art
'1:::ot.:g
st_ong


. .....-ids lor ·cransit righ·cs - o:Z- way


o::
onatio:1
the
ubl:c sc~t: -
m :-.t be .i:-.c. :..-~~Jid transit in Atla ta should assure -:}:e s-cate' s r.,axi;-r.u::: pa:-":.:i.Ci"')i:.t i c :1.
t,,a·c as .::.zc:c
For purposes of fisc:il p la:-i .i:1,e , t~ercforc:, it
ig:1.-c be a.,:.s-,..;.::-.... ~
s ~:53,000,000 will be rr.adc avai:;1blc against t·1c ·co·.: . .
c .... n c:c-... cos·.: of the 30-1.ilc basic syster., in ~2·cropolite1n Atla:1 a .
·""":-_G ::,c ~:. s:.c:..::..~c of t~ .e basic syste::i \~~' l
.:...:--.. c.
,
..
e :...ppro. i r.i ately ~19· ,000 ,::
dis~~ibution of capital costs b; sources would be
s foll ~ s:
- 24 HAM
E A "'"""" ' ,.
1 L .. R t\O J
I~ -
-
1
�... rr.... , L.:.1
Po_ ce:-.t


.


l/=-~=;cJ~;; , . . v
Locd
Sta-;:.e
-~ e::'a_
59_9;



.0.0



J.l


··J,CCG_-JO
~JC,OOC, 200
.,;:=,3:?,oo-,o.:,o
~
· --.,
1:.._-..-.e ,ts o:.: $25,000 , 008 . e·c: ..
.I . . . ...... .._ _
a~so b


he sta~e ' s co~~Tibu~io~



.: c, stn.:ct::.or: .


~ng overt~~ 9 - yea
I;: -c c ca
1;.;
--~
o::
. ........ r'.


FeGe ... 2.l :.: \:.:.d ·, of cci.lrs.,, ·..... c: pat-c:.e:..--:-, of c.:.v::.i::.abili'.:y :-:iay be c:..i£:fer ··:. ·::. Lc::i


__ ·s:1::.:-,ce of Local 60:ids .
avai · ab::.e
Loe~::. ::u.'1cs •.,ould be ::-.~'
·... ::.:!
i..




om o: bo::..:.s i ·su~d as a:pproprL:.te ·.::o n: .:::·c "" ·· :,i:·oj ec-ced d:tm·1ciow:1 sc}::::dt::::.e






oi
0:-,_;·.::_Lct·o:1 cos'.:s set up by t: e en~inec:.·s.
p:rovided
act t. ese :..cc.:l bonds :::ighL. be of two :·.:. ds -- bo:1ds issu2
i::.-.:e:.·e:s·... , c:;--.d ge e _al oblig tio:1 'GO) b~-r.cs issue
tr.
by
l
'
t::-2:
~~ ..
r,':'.
by ,.'.. TT _; i·.:sL::..:.:·
loc : :. -rove :..·.1: .. -:-.~s
i::- o~-r-1 bo;;di g capac::.-ties ;1ith the proceeds turn d ave:· -.::c,


!.ur.1p fo::;:.:.


··--- ---\- .-.
.1
..,,,-,
... __
!.. ..
.,,v· ...
•'- -
9
-
C
..J
In either cas0, t .e f..:.~cs i:ould be :.:1:.1de avai::..c.~:.....; -.:o
-nts with the
acc.:~
~ota::
f
eac. gove:..·nm r.t,




.oc:1- e,":):;_igat.:.ons tr.at mi~;(-21: be stipc 2-ted,






t.
~
.d other t-:::::.-:-:-:s
- 25 ~
A ~1 .i f R .
~
?. :
L
~ :
S , L ,. 11
,\
oJ
» :
...
..
~ .;
---
�,,...
.- -:. c. ~ :
...,- -.._._..,_.._.
~-8-_~.:·_-_ "i: :z·~--c..:





.sc2.l










.nvol •;c ~.. z..--:.- / :.:c!C"CCl'S • .c~t:.Ci::z




s-.: atus
......, v--... .__,
act · l a . o:..: .·,:s
stc::.:e a~d
d ·')· ssi'o:..0 Vc!1.·i a:cio. s in t ' c


.·;:·.-.'cm.-:-.


o_ ::.oca::. oo:--.


.:\.1.: d




1..; ,.:;




s r lat d to fr,:::d avc.::.: c!bi...:..~- :.::-:..·c::1 o-d,e _
as fc!!o:s for
~~e
p
ec· ed 30-
i:..~
OUTCeS
C&...
0
S
._
j~s::.c syste .:
- '.:: 6;; A ,., M
e R a ,.
~
t f
~
I LE"
.. " .. .:. ::: ; ""
·1
�';·blc
7
,,cy
Dl. .. ~.,r,~UV" \ ' • ~
•ar,
I
(cu. ...:~ . )
("'
,I
,.. .....
$ ::,'"{
- _, >J 'J
>:)70


- i:


-
.)
.
• 0. 7,
I
0
-
II
-.
2S
s::;
25
C. .
'j_t, 7
5(
,
)
v.:..-



,.)




176
so
207
l97S
-
10~
('
y
25
~r-3
2 8
_,.,....
....
50
30
9
320


.. 77


$100
5-'.:> -.-
10
~33
!/ Pre:i~ina=y s~ cdu:c cf ~ceds for !a~ci
nu:· chase a;-1d cc:,s·cr c '. :io. es·.:::i.b:;.ish · d
by t~c cr. 1 ine rs .
2/ ~L!'.... T TCVc::1U · Jo:1cs s;_:::,por-.:ed oy locr.l
gove:. ......;r:.: ur.c....:::: ::::. t::.:-.z o-z: S3 .. e.:·al oo iig::c.-c::.on bonds o~ locc..::. ,;v:.:::.:.·...:2r:.: -
issued for _.,.__~
_·.:: ...
·i:::c:...,s:..: p:.irposes .
no-:: d that t c ab ove sc· .ecu::.e o':. ft.:,d c:1.va:'.. iabi:L.y, c:.s -:ir<2:::.::-.::-. ..::-
set forth, does not dire ctly ma·~ t.
sc:,e ule of fu:1d :1ee :s .
s:..;;-.:-;_y because both sets of figu:-cs are ;1..-:.ccs::::-:·:.:y ter:~:::.-.::.ve
30th · Ii L. be al tercd in the course of ·c:'..;1.e .
'.\.:.s is
a.,c
?- · E: .. ::.,. .:::.·:,r.
T.• e: dcve o;:i,.:e.:t o:: su ' -- ::.
.r~li~ir.~ry t~ole is neccss~~Y,
s:o::s of ·.:he fin~ncial i!c1pact of ~·1:. '.'A o:1cr:1tions t::?on t:1e locJ.l gov ~r;:.::-:::-.t;;.
Bor:<..! 1.ss1..;.es
-··
~
as needed .
.: .• e
~:: c ·: e
"!:!3./



ie mo:..--e ::.ss:..2s of s:na::. ler s:..zes o:::- ::0·.-·a:r iss1..:~s o




_:.r_;G:· s:. :.cs
-27t-.t.t.,~::R.oa
er,,:; . _ .. ,.. .. _ .. _.,;.~. ;, _ __
I
�lccc:.::.
'.: ::.::.:-.:.s
fo::..·
0
. -.-....- .... "-
-.,
.,_:1
iall
\,....
local
1.. ..... ....:
It :...s
~cnts) ~c~lJ be 3J - yc~~ :.ss~~s .
?le-..:.,,1,;- oi prop2rt' ta.· levies to sup::;,:;::..··.: ·c: c obl i gat.:.on, it is c.r.-::::..-=:ip
bo::.:: - ·.:o...;_
c2rry c.
t. a .
' ::.rcccy b
... -..~
~- -
a ...,
'•
\.... \.....,.., .,::> 1,,.,..1..
·or._'.Jly
'.) C
o;,..·
u--,
~- s: O'.i
_.._ '
~-.: ,,,., an
oca:.. g 'Jc:-:1..--:-..:::--; s .
of p0r., p.:; o:-:e-' ,alf of one pe:.·cer:··
rea -
assw . ci .
'";}~.:: anl
J.CV1;:l
e ci
co - 0
rapi
. ' -~~---:s:. t bo;1ds iSS;.!Cd
a lC.:.
i;i Tz.;J le 3 on t .c fo:.1c1..'i.~~ p~..3e .
g ar:mtecd
r..:-.u o,.e - ··. l
ca ry::..ng
or p yrr.e .·::
~'-
C. l..
--l...i......... ,., ::. ccc. l
Revc:!;.;e 00:-.d
~
.
~
. :;y
C ri,
,.
..1..->~- ...... \..-
y loc~l. gove:.."7! . e .t co .-;:r::.ci:s '-~-



.




pe cent in tzr st :-at
tr r.sit purpos s by
.,._ -
~
t. .... \,,,,
local govc
.L.
ents are sh~·:·:::
-.:ou_ ne:rcen t .
rlJ..1".1MER
f.E~
r..
G:t . ~
J.; ... _~ ...
....
___.
�._ I
.
T:-:olc 3 .
I
-
,. ~
, ,~r~r.~·--:..J ~
•
._. •::, ..._ L
_._, -..J~
...:
/,'f _~ \., '\"'~\
Pri71c:.,: :..
.'i~.0'c..::t
GJ
Issu.:::
Of 3c::-,o.s
} 96~
1970
~2 S, 000,CCJ
'_':)7~
35 , 000,00v
$ 1,7:S,OOJ
' _, (., ~·3, 000


.. , B:25 ,OvO


-, , ::.vO, v()O
1 715,00G
. -1- ,
-!-,3CJ,GJO


..073


197..;.
-o,GJ0,8JO
1975
197'
50,000,00J
3J,OOO,OOO
9 , 000,00G
1973
7,546,COO
3,0::,0,000
7,725,000
l:'..,37S,OOO


'..3,:'..38,000


7 ,26i;,OOG
10,6 L!-,000
12,3~7,00G


.2 ,97. ,000


l2,l~G7,000
12, .07,000
13,i'S::-,000


.3,ldS,000


1979
13,_.:;s,coo
1980
1981


2,575,0CO

_2,209,000



.. 2,G99,000


1982
Li 6 , 0 CJ
16, co J
.·, 1


!.1,8(4,000


11,505 , CC,'.)
E, ~-04 , 000
(T·:.on level p;:y::ie·.1·..:" t:.n t i l


-,.els ~:.... e ::.. . ti 0L)


]:_/ A.7.orti z ation (_;:cir.ci:Ja:. a~:d interest) cha:tg s
of all 01.:tstand::.ng :.,~:,Cs for :::-2.pid tra.nsi ·..:
u::1ce r ·..: e t.;o <--:.. t-)r:: ·.:::. ve 1.1et .ods of fi;ian c ing 1A ··r. ' capi ·.:.:il co::: ts .
I t is noted
1
l (
?
-....,1.J-.
at t . e . . . re u;:;.l cost o-.Z servicing ·· ese bo~ds d:.·o?.,, o~-.Z
77 (~ e d;: c o f t e l·s~ iss ·e) a~
':'~,is ::.s because a 20 perc0"t sin ,ir.g fund _cserve is DTov:.-.:...::t.. :: _
ov2r -. : he ~irst five year s of



.ss:..c




decli1.es to a level ::::::o.... nt
e~~
issuE:, u,d at
l. · "'
end of five y2~~s
c&:r:r.:. e s a level payme ·c to r.atu. i ty .




,~. .y-:: ..:.n-::s a:-e :-;;a c in ·ci:






fi r st five ye~;.·s of e::ch issue,
-c:..:. .. ::;c-iod ::.s actually 29 instead o:i.: 30 years .


ss2


,_ .,
21'.
t::e a..:o ·c.:.::. -
T' e level :?;:y:::-:!::-..::s ~=·::.;;:.·


c1.
!c co. :i::1ue through 1997 at which t::.~e ·t y wou1·


_9t,9 is..;_3 is ret i red an
so on u, til :.i.11 i?sues ~re paid off .
- 29 HAM1.tEA
GRE:.P'. ~
.. 1tz;;,


...,_c~ , ;.·.


�.__......
':).
.. ..
,.. - -~-.-:'\.; '-


.n t~i.s 2r,aly -


-a. l
upon F :;_ -con :_:.:.d 0c'.:'alb c o· ,·:::ie s , t·:2.-::: . .= 1 yto::1 ::.::d
Gw i:n:.::.·.: t -:: !' i ng up ·ch i
s '.- ::r e o-3
·::t.e c os ·.:
o .. l y i:.: t .
s y s te:";1 i s e. ·-.:a::C:.e
..i 2.e - •
, t h e f a cts
At::..:::-.·.:a c.rea
e~u::. ::. ly c lea~ tat
as - a ::louri s· :;,r,g a-:-:d c -pa:-. - ··J e c onc ..y ca·:nb l e 0£ s ..:~.:.?o:--::::... g
~ocal ·.:x payers o
a,.d
~~c
-;:' e \ ·: .01e ai-
..::cv::.. ce chr.·-ges - - i nc0ed the a~g:.egatc
.:..:x. lor.c. c a:-rie
"oy loc .:.::. ·.:::.
'c 1.....:, t2. is c9 . h •.;::::b :!.y les
major " etropol::.tan areas .
. ·,v :::::..·c,po::.
~,..,_e demand
· tan Atlanta grows l arger, bu~ ir.c o::ic
a:,
a-.: '-- cor:::-11 ns :rate rate .


.o..:i..~ ~::.seal ?·


ospects
lc...,al gover·nrr.cn
fir,ance
-3C -
~he Aetr0pol::..t"n
. '-'--...
.,._ ... ":l""il".·,...
\.,
.....
�of
-- ... , ~- ...
.... u .............. .....
...
~
'-·. C.
,..... 1
..__ .........
,. . . ~-- ..::.t-.;.J.. .
\.,.1,. _
_;i
.....
(T
b
.::o:.::.:---~S .
,,,...
JOJ.:c._ ·~i~l
l ',1 •
c:.c -
doct::r:o,. ·..:.)
In ~ict-'-opoli t.:..




.j o::






c:.rea's
ge;ic::,:a::.:.. · :. .:.~::"r b ~caus.:; ::>0·;:·
"-'
s rvices
c.YC
se vice c
the ,uo.li·..:y ;::r.d c;_u~nti ty of local
ts a ... e
ubi.ic
_c;,..:·ly suuc:r or .
T:-.~ ::· nc:ncial problcr:-s of · e C::..ty of At:;intc. are partict:" arly ~cute .


_
;crtic. al i::1c-:.:-e2se in -_~-" ,me f:-o:-. cxisd.n~ sou_ces ,,:ive r su::.t


di::ficu· ti s .



0~1e·.rcr.





.-;
l2.nta is not unli ·e o·cher .1a30:- .:::ities ::.n this r .;arc,


':"ne S".li::.1 -over o:Z ·)0·0ul2.t~o::1 a. d industry into outl.yir:~ 2.rcc:~,
tre g:.cm-:::..:~g o· so:cscencc of parts o:: the cent:ca
core, the ir:.creasec:. co .. .::,2·-
ol -..:·.e ccr:tral c::..ty activity an
fo:::: a 1 ve::. o::
.,_:.: ---'"'~:..i"t::y sc:;.·v:.ce: .:::01; :r.ensurate uit .. big ci·cy sta··us have
11
.e
C , • [ n


.. S :


.1
., .
-.)
_N
A M .,1 _ A
G~
N .c.


.::


~
i:::no:;.·-
�1
.
...
--- J


.. ...


.



,&.::.: ......... ,




~c·.....r_ ·.:y - '.-1:. ~c
' CV " '.":UCS.
3~out : .
~
class j)U"Ji.
~eed fo
C


-uture tax i:-.cr-::...s c.:S ~:.C: . .;;u sou::;:-c,.; · o~ "":.·av .. u,.; · -- ::::.rs


sc_vic s


md G•.-1inr.e·-t fa ce t e


~·
to be p~ o·.ri c-... .
r
5 i;,e
1. in2: ci:1:'..
g::.·owin~ subu-;..·ban co·c... ·~i s i1
ot
'
.1 .('........
C~;:.y~o.
c:.lrea y ru'-'"\ - ·t .-.T,....... _,.- +-'-
s ·-:1at h~--
~r~~3L..:'
c,i
ou·c~yi::_; ~o~::.-~ic
~
~:...~ge ~e~ro~olitan areas .
I: is a fact of si ple arit::r:-.c·.::ic
~: . e Lcca::.
prir.,c.rily t"!-1.e property ta. ) or con:p :..c-.: 2:;.y ,
8'.J
in the years ah ad .
u~iquc si·cuatio,.
This is by :10 Leans
e natio:1 races,



i.




so-..i1·ccs of
2venu,.:; o_ .:,j·~--



.:s ..:::i.cec:., o:.:- \·Jill :iz.c




t :C.c s:,...-::0
f.!.~:..~ci~: ~rob::.c·ns .
E.:::0::.··.: s ·co get a sc:.fos tax for loc<.!l 3ov,:;1-:u:ie:1ts in Georgi::.. f ilec
i.:.:st sess:0:1 of the Gener 1 Assc~b!y tu: ~:.e~~ w:11 conti n a to b3
~
~s::..3-
state's cities
-32ii
~


'rl M \; i\


0 Fl
t
E r. L .., I l
~
i-
J.
~


..., ::


... 1'
..
_ __
�/
loc;..~ sit·
.....
.
1..- .... ~
..... _,.,
is b;
'- • •
-i ~:::,
~-,
~,.
..: ,,._
~a~~dly incraas~ g its,
i:-: ...:~.. e



. oa





.LC


is
lea:.- ly


10 -c


locnl govc :r.:ci1t
c~~
clen
y a ·fo:..·u
J
-33,1 ;.
L,
t~ .,;
Gh £
t ,.
S I LE
H
A
~
.:; 0 .:
~
" '_. .)..
C G:7.C
..... , ot:,e::.· :-::a~ o::.· u:·ba:-: ce . .-.: C;::-s .
otl .:rs .
servi ces, t~~;
. . . ... ~--
c apo.c :. ty ·co :::,::..,
seyv~ c cs;
co:r.pc:.re.:! .::: . ·.::: ·c:. e ta
,
.. 1.\..,.
.~
•
�/
Rclia:-:cc-
I/
_or


i - ·ccc:.....c:.~-·cio


~.





r,1:·.e ?Y0}_lC:." t 4' r t~X is :l_::...)D.~/ c.!"/ail::.:..',.J.,3 3.S 2. SOL!TC ~ .


·o ;;..c.dition:d 1.eg::.sls:cio, 1·:ol!.:.d. be _co_-;..::.r(o·d to tc:-".l


~ \.- fo-:."' ra id -~ ransi ·_ f:_~~:-1cit1~~.
1. ·- cui te
?8Ssibi2 tha~ the loc~: ;ovcrncc:-:ts wi:l sue eeci
i::. l.:lci r cf-for
·co ge·c ..:..C.di tio!.~l sou:.. . ---~s c·:... . ..3vc::ue in L.:-:0 d3.ys a:-:~a - - a sa!es -~a:'°; a. pa Yoll
·:::..;.., 3- _ ir.co::-:8 t.:.· o :..· so~:1.::: ot'.:2:r .1e1i -ol!::..·cc -- b·c1t
t~e p_ o pects at t'.e : -.. ::..:::r." c:.:.·e S? >culat.:. ve n; ·c· .e



-:-=:-.:: fo:r a clefir:i'ce x.:. :12.1 cia pl:::-: ::o·· rapid t::2.n _·c



.:.s irrj. e ia te .


1
2.
_,:oreov~ , i :c ~ -·:l sou ces ol 1... ~,.t.:::-1u..; a:..--e .::iS. ~e i'.l\'cli l ;;.c:'..e to · - e local iovc:.·::-.::.c .·cs, ·c!1" :,roce <ls will be
r:ced2d for ot;:1.,r r,.ii-poses _ui t:; ,s::_)C.l"t fro!!! r pid
~-~nsit -- c -~~<led cur_e~~ oo~r~~ions
oi t, e
-
.,'.)vcr11i-re:1ts ar.· o:: t!'le sc,,ool sys-cc:ns . As alr ady
~-:oted, st~dies de;;1or..s·c:..·a·l: the :!C:<.::d ::or new ourc s
of revcr:l!c whetn r or r.o·· p::op,L ·cy ta.· :.:c:.tcs ~Ye


.· i.,.::d =oi- Yapid transi\:: or o'.:: er pruposo


':'.::; p:.·or,<..:rty tax is aot un;:.1,1ly bur e: so ..c on local
tz.::p&.Je:.·s in Ae-::_o?olitar•.4:~L:.r.ca. Indc-d 1::_~ vi ~ence is clear -chat t~e loca: ?TO~crty t~x could b
.;ubstc:.ntially raised c:...C: stii2. be: safely wit: .in t' .e
r...,:.::..·gin of reasonableness an
econo::iic feasibi:i.i ty .
7:1e goverr_-::c::1ts of :at:.::opol::c- :-: . tl nta i. tLe
c:.gzre 6 a·cc have one 0£ t· <.: loi 'C;St c_fcc·ti.ve ~ - _ s 0:1
1,ropc::ty of any local govc::-r~r::c_1ts in r.iaj o_ !lcet::opo i tan ::::::-eas i:1. the United S ·ates. Local ta:·pQ.yers pay
considerably less on t, eir pr perty thc..n taxpayer
i·1 :::cajor areas e se1v:1crc. In s:10:r-c, there is excess
capacity in this lbcal r0venLc s · rec at the pres t
~in:c .
-34H , ~.t M
Fi
Oh E E HE
$ I -
? S A S S .J ,;
.., "" - ..
�3.
.·:"'i · p.,;..J~-l~.:-:.:s :~~:t'-~
.
.
.
.
i...:n..-~ ~-: con·~:.. i2c·c ·. . l:.:.Cl~ :· :.:·--·~c ·c. .. 3 \!U.L!:c·_...... -:.= - · s oona
·is . .,. •I.:' ,....., •• c::·'-L. Ov ..J....,:..S....,\,;1 ~-?.J._
,. -- ...__ ...... . . .- . . . t......L..L
......; -:.:--C ...... .:; l ' " ( e -. . ~LC
, .· ...
0
'·:~2.i1:s ·t =.ocJ.:. ?:._"o _jC:..·.,..:; :.1:- c~;.~ .-._\~~'~. · ·uc~1C:.s ::.:."'·::: :-:o
f.1-:--1(: a r [... r c..... ::cc~·y::;_:)~~ ,....::.. . 1~~-..: ':::1C:~-:. o:7fcrc<l =ur
saL . Bo1 . COt,:-is2:.. <-~_:-._;(. ·::: __ ._ ·C::i- :plcc;:: o:E ....
?~ }Crty ta:-: j_:3 1.ry :.s \,..j:::ie;~·-::..:_.::~ co a.:;sc.:.. . c ·he ~::-ope:!'
!~2.·pkct r.zc8~J io::1 o~ .,~~ . e..;G b~ .:~s c:::: ~ r.:J; cy - 2.·;in;,
~~tercst
G ncr l o~~.:. :::.~io~ ~o~~s ·ssucd ~y


..ocal


o:Z coi..::.-sc,
~
j
-
L,..
-'
,.-,
..
,..
-.
.. h ~ J
j __ _ _ ..........
1.-
=-t .
0



. vies .




.IOU2.
.' 2.1 loc:::.::. :;ove _1n cnts i::i :<c:·:::::0:10:i.i-::c... Atla 1·.:2. h2. re
gv . . - bo~-:. TJ.t:..ngs based ll_JOl7. ·.:::.~ St:."Or.. ..~·L: of t:lC
co::or:,y 3 .cl sou,:d ::.:.sc::::.l r.:an, •.~c:nent . Su::po t.::: oy
a S? ·cifi c milla~e ~a~e on p:opcrty, new bonds


..ss· 2d :i:o: · c.::,id Lr:: ,:;::. ·~ s· .c.L! .:::r: ·oy favoi·.::.blc


r.. .ir'·ct c:cc pt2_ncc wr..:.c __ c~n :.·vsul in savi ..gs of
'.:housancs c: . •d even :. ill::.o. s o~~ doilc..rs in int r es
o, :r ·::he p ~riod of lo.1:;-tc:c.:: :.:i::12.ncing .
addition~! obliga~i0n of
fo:.- t:.:~.-c
·,Yc.:"")OS
•
u~~
~--iting t.e ca:1ita
NE:w sou_ ccs of re c:-.1.:e ::..re .c -c.ed
tra~ i~. as al~cady indicated .
o:
1vi th out :-:::.:1::..~
ere w.:.ll al3o j~ pressures fo~ adci:tior::::.:..
i:!'lcrcases wit: out rapid "!:rc:ns · t.
~~co;~
...;·1e .
cosc of
.:act r . a::.ns,
~~?i . ~~ansit -- it is, as ~otcd, an available -oLrc




.nd o~...;






u:tt a·~:~ionai capacities to produce.
d0c:sion, of course, is th~ ·peop c 's.
Tne lai·: estab:is'.i::_.,
system clearly states
fir.ar.ci::.;
Ht..MM!:R
C,-E(h~
Sll1;.;;
".)~-1
..
,.
.:,
_
�.
of
.
(...1,_; ._(; _ _i _ _
..,.(;
/
not ....L. -.1 ...\..:-,.
lOC:'.. ;..
govcr:1:,:1..-1,'.::
T1c ~cccss::..ty OL
x;ioL.1.1 . . ~ or ~-;.ou:-its :i. :vol
~s :ighly ~csir;:_ble bec~u e i ~
rc.ises i s
-;:~---.e :_Jeoplc
_,..,
__
.J,.~....., _
tr2. s it v i · - a - vis ot,~:- types of p~olic
ques ·.::::..o.. ::-:.ight b "
~a:.


c·vi ce


c.;C: as :o
not t te
I n ge~er~: . ~ost
with li~it cd abil i ty to pay.
a:..-
·.: a:..:e




-e:.;ress::..ve excent th






cc.:-ef-.;11 1 graC:uated i .come tax a.1c. th::..
so~:-co is not l::..'· ~y to beco~e avai!~bie lo:- rapid tra. si L fina. ci::g ::..n
,· ... ,.·r,r,
.·--1-~--,.,
L c..1-,. L._. -•·
L ,-.; . ar .t:utur-C: ,
.1.
1·,1-.i..·-:-1--_
I
_ ._
•...··.
e pro~---c·,·i·
on o ·._ -.-·r,,e
$2,000 .o... ·s ·,-·e~--
e.·0::-._:.rt::.0n, (.{le obvio:.:.s corr el tio . bet ·:03:: L,con:
and prope:.·ty v2.. :.:es
(inc_~~in[ rentals) and the hit . p:-o?or~io:1 ol all property taxes ~a:.c ~y


-.0:-.:-es:.c.


0:-,
properties, t '.:
property
is considerably less regr s
ir.C:bii-~ls tha:i ,.ost forms of levy.
':::':-.e :;::,oi.:1t about Mctropo:1 t~n
tlar.t& s relatively lo ·1 property tz...·
n 1964 - 65, ~ctropo:::..t::
cu:-cie~ c.t Lhe pr se,t time should be strc~scd .
Atl-~ta ra~ked 33rd out of the 38 :argcst :.c~ropolita1 u~2as int: e ~c.~ic::
Cc..:iita :-ever:· e to local govc:r:irnents fr o,. p::..·ope_ ty soi...:::-ces.
only 7tJ, pe...cc:nt as_ g:.·eat as the meciiaD ~or all
a:..·,_ ...,.





.::.::-. _:_j_









?:..\'.J:_'.)erty revenue as a perce t of revenue from loca::. s0c.:-ccs


(:;:c
s.:....:.::.:-ces was low r i:-, :-.:etropol::.tan Atl:ntz. than t:--ie ove::..:-..!l
__
HI.
1,i
r.1


!


R. U
E. E !1 E. :'.;
i
L i :.i ;.. J
~
..
.j , ~ ":' c
E:
-
�- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -
- - - --- -








143.215.248.55 16:50, 29 December 2017 (EST)o~o!.:t:...~ ~=c~
(..ccti2.r.)
,.' '~ ...· c~:ui ·c ~ ::.-cvcnucs
~o :o - ~! govc143.215.248.55cnts
143.215.248.55 16:50, 29 December 2017 (EST) Jro~crty sources
? ~o?~~ty ~~; ·nee cs
..J...::-(:
-·:1:
of rC! 1.r~::.t:c
J ~o?e~~y ~e ·c~ce a
t of 143.215.248.55 16:50, 29 December 2017 (EST)UC
=::0r:: 11 sot...r .:: cs
)f~Ce,
l
!/
Al: loc&l govc~~r::e~-cs in Metropolit~.
Atlan·.:a co:;-1bi,-. c.
~i . ~ncing rapi · transit t1rough the ,=opcrty -cax would involve a
stra.:.;;. tfo::.:-ward set o:.. operations.
cont:::.i.cts with K.;.RT
of op~ ... 2.·~ir:g
'fr,e :ccal gov::::r:-11T,e::ts
1,
·o...il
c
'CC.:'.:
under 1.:hich , 1A, " / i:ocld agree to perform t:1e ..:-:.::-.c·c:...::-. -


tJ.pi<l transit system anc ·.:.,c govcn...r.e:nts woul


o::,2.:. £;.... ·.:e
t\1e:s:s0!v ·S "CO c.ndcrwrite t C capital cos·.::s 0:i: t'.c .:1yStcm U ,der Spec:_;:.::_;;,::
con~it:ons a:::, si:cc::.ficd ccilinJS.
f.:r,:...,1c:.n,;; ,_·o-..!.LC. be the issua. c
o
As ~h·o.::.dy described, one .. e'.:: .oc. 0-f
gen.cr:11 o'oligation bo:-ic.s by
__ c':c:::.--r,~.--.-.::s v:i th the paymen'c of the p::oc.::eds ·co ~11
.::.utJ--. rity,
h0 ice:. ...
S'....!C ••
oo:: ... -


..,e~.--; sup::,0::-·c,.:d oy property t:ix lev_es \11."chin the const::. ti.Jn2.! li::::.-: ..... ·.:::.c .. s


es-c~":):::..s::c:.L'. fo:- such bonds.
Th;; . . . i tcr::ative w::thod 1,10u:ci b
·.:he kvy o.:
�..,,.)
.:..ssJ...:J


.:.t..·:.:::o:.:ity lo:: t:-.c



. .s rccogni::.l,.


, o~r
of
,.., .... -..
.; r_
C .__.,_
L ...._
co--:rs . ,
...
\.,..J
Ful t cn
cepencab~c anc icst - g::o~ing r-v n~e source
a:::e
~~c
"
-
Fulton Cot.:.n-.::y . c:.s jc1s'.:: cc ..pl tcd the :..· eevalu.:ttion of :.ts
r..ss...:ss:..E;_-_·c rolls to .: e8t ti is Tequirc:ne:,t, 1:::..t~ ::m
r..djilst~c~t int: c tax rate (mil:~ge ruteJ.
acco::::?:::1ying c.o•..;:-:.,;ar,.
De~~lb County has m~ce ~o


J.~Just :.~:,t as yet and has aC:vi:,cd '- r..t such c:.n a justmer.t n::1y 1:o·c oc


~ecess~~y i~asmuch as assess~c:1ts are a:=eady fairly close to :~c
c...:~: lcve: . (Some estimates indic~te
~t~~
~~
pc~-
=c.'alb Co~~ty's c:.ssess=~~:


.:_ v.:ls a::-::: closer to 3(.l pe..::-ce:-.t of r.:.cr··e:·~ v:1-~e 'ch;..n ~O p -:!·cent 2.::-.-.i so::-..


u.O',!


-c'. c.djustmcnt may subseqacn·c :y b..: r.-:::cesscTy, wi ·::· . a!I u::;·.,c.:-~ [.". 1..s 1..Both Clayton &~d Gwi~ ,ctt counties al:-e=dy c=~~y


,_ ss --.;s: .. 1.,:: i..~ c.t the 40 pcrc..:mt h ,vel .
-38-
�Fi
~,.... r - _...,. ,_.
............... -·



, .. s::..c




-I
su;:;s:q:.ieL::
... 1
.. .
r""\
~
•7• 1 1
·xtc.1sio . i . . ..1r.c.8:. . t:. .:o . , i·c is reco~~cn~(;' ttat
1
.... ~ ..... .J.



ys·ce
i:; ·__ c,;_lu oe




llo -: atc<l
It is possib-
beer: give
'.e "i:\:o
8t·.;e2..
that
2.:1
cm.1r.'cy govc:;:nmcnts .. c..s a:. :..· cs. ·y
.:.l-:::crnc.:ivc ::orr.1:.iia migtt O(; cc:-.side:·cd
ti _t wou· cl bre.1.· ot.:t tie Ci y of .'u:lar.·co. as a s
DC.
o:..~
.:.te ·urisdi
f~~:..~ci~~ purJoses, but it ~ould · ~nec.r core r~asona~le top oc~~- on-~
c t..:·.::y _,:_.s2.s.
T':-c
~
.:.pid ··ransi·:: syste:.: clc:.:cly 1.-1i 11 8.··cend bey.:·:-...:
its ·;plico.t · or.s w·11 be f l t ove:..· a·
bo-..i darics an
si:ed, of course, that residents of the CiTy
it s .. oL_S.: be
a ...
2
.._
o res · --.ent s of both -ulto . rn
t~ei~ nrc1ortionate share o
D :·alb counties and t:1ey
co· ::1ty levic .
l ~:l~~T
h'OL.:G
p.:-..y
Uncer a sys~e8 oi
the county property ·::ax, ·che ::.a::-ge co:n.rne:::-cial


n~~al!Q.tion3 in the City o


At!an:a wo~:d carry a najo~ share o= t~a
ovc:rall ou::.·(~cn .
.\s , __ :;:-i..;_.<ly r:otcd,



t




is o.ss1.... .. cJ tl,_
costs on t!.e 30 - !l
tLe local sL· r., of ::i:::..:~>S,
sys:e2 would be $19~,vC , oo-:: ,
- 3:) -
�,-
-,--
--- --
~
~,
~.I·--~-- -
ur.dcr
t\·:o ..c-:::hoc' s of :!:ir.a.i1Cir:z:
s: .:::;;
or
c·,)::..--.:.::::.1
riosts
?:....::. to::1 County ·
J ...,:(c:.lJ Cou_ ty
A;
Ol'
t Of
C~:)itc. l Co -:::s
Vri1:cipc.l)
73 . St
26.S
,' l4-6, 2C, OCO
lJ0.0%
$ F9, 000 ,000
I.
s:2,7::;s,000


=;ove::::-.::·,c, ts.


Tr.is analysi
,·::. __
I
I
cov r ~~rce alternative ~rogr~ras


mthor.:. ty J.::::.sed


fi~~ncing oft e system t~=o~gh t, e
t:·)0;1
pay:ncr,ts
.r:••
J_
.L
, ••
t.:-.e loc::.::.
gov0rr.:::;.;r:·.:s :Eo~ bone. aii'.or-cization, ·c. "' is~ua:::.ce of ge.-ieYal o';)lig2.tio::1 bc:::ds
o1
t:·. · .;ovc:..·:;-.:;-_-.;;-_ts therr.selve- wi tr p:-oceeds ?a::.d over ,-co





..xe~ sys'.:er:1 in whic:1 both methods mig .t








,-. .~
~~::r:' ,



.T.




a
c c, ployed .
30:1ds by ~:AR7A
'The ;;10thod of co ·. :racting be ..Hee;,_ ·,:he local_ gover::--w1e::1:s :::.:-.-:: '.<..\:":'A tc



r..·oc.u.cc:




fun<is with which t:1e: authority can ;:wet annual carr •::..:-1.; cha::; "'-S c::


.-cs ca')ita::. bo:;-,


issues involves a s·c:raight:Zo:.'·wa:..·d procedure .
To e=::cc·.:-u2.-:3
t:1is ::_:;::.a.n, vote::-s \lOuld be as,·ed to au',:horize -::he levying of tue ::1ecc ·ss::.·'
-;::2._·
(:-.::..:!.I&.,;.::~ :;co:;.t::;;s with ceilings 2.s -::o bot::-. rates and the -::ota :.. "'-•··" _,_::,,
·.::o be r"":.s -d .
No local bon3 c;::.:::i2.ci -::ies
l
ould be involved ::..na.,,:::i.:..::::
H f, W. 1,1 I: A . 0 fl E E ,, i , C I l ( H A S "' 0 .; I " "' i .:.
---
�,...,
cs ·.:r.c iJon...:s ·.. o:...:;.d be issu:::
·-·-- ......
---·-
~
ble 5 .



'\.,_




--'-'
--
Ii":)IC, TSD r'OU:- 1'::'Y S'L~.Ri:..:. OF ;,t~.~r1·~ 30~D
.:i.:.-. .~Li:
1
SYSTE\
aol2.a:..· s)
=:i1(:ic~ ::~d S::.~-:-0



ic,'(::l b




F:..-1 tot.:
Co;i: ·cy
1969
1970
197:!.
1972
1973
197"
1975
1976
s
.:::ct::1:'.:y
,'
1,3°H
..
ry
-
9,0.:,1
,
,:;
4,330
,380
8,030
7,725
11,375
13,138
13,795
13,::.35
-
.L, ..:..Q.,1,.
2,123
2 ,0-'.-7
3,014
5,678
8,361
9,656
977
$ :,B25
_...,
1, ?.::
434
l.? l~ . .
3,2:i.9
3, 2::.9
5' 02



.978




Cost
~8'-!
y
1 ..
l > .::,L,~
10,139
Tota.:
,nnual
3 .,~-82
3,656
3 ,'-'19{;
, ..1..::, , .... 5
3, 49-.9,691
... 0.SO
3,332



.2 ,575




9.2~3
235
1981
8,974
3


!.2,209


1982
S,893
3,206


2,0


(These level 2.r.nual p3.yr.:ents to the co::1 p::.e·ce retirement of bonci issues begi:-,r.ing
in 1997).
1979
- •l-1H ,". r,i M E h
Gh
t ,_ E
~
I • .:. -.
J. ..
~ v
.;
"" , •
�1
•
'. .'C:J.1-G
r:ul ".:0,1
1 < o9
1070
197:'..
1972
1 73
1974
1975
1976
1077
1 78
! 79
1980
198:
1982
1983
.7
.7


.6


1.5
2.6


2 . 4

5 . 3


3 .6
3 .6
3.2
3 .0
2.7
~.5
2.4
2.2
........ - . ,
,
.JC
_, ...... .I..
-
.,'
D8:2.lb
,
. 4
. .,.
,1
.9
.9
1.5
1. 3
1. 8
1.9
- .9
i. 7
1.6
i .4
1. 2
.
.,j4
1
•
.L
1.1
I-c is possible i.J.nd it would be c.esir<lb:i.e to resc, dule
·c.,1..,S(;
.:.0vi...cs
to ,J-·ov:i.clc. ,ore subst::u t.i.a.:. pa)'11'(;, ts i. the earlier ye rs and lo·.·2r pz.:· :.::·,.ts dtir.:.n2
a~ ~ltc~~-t·v
t'.,c peak years bctwe1,;;": 197:5 ;..nd .:.97S .
It is r C0::'2.c·;;.(ce,i -~; .c...
sc. cdule of taxes ~i ht be conside~ d, ~- ich
~o~:~ 143.215.248.552
-42-H A M l',1 ; H
GR : ( N
S : • ER
A 3 .:; ._ ,:


..


¥
~



.




�' .....
J. C
ii:...ng
£ol:.o·,:.:c: .
bo::c.
!-:owcve ,
,,.,-e; _. :_ save
CJ . Ol.:..1
t of
.10 •
of ~is:_ni l and va:ues i::
y =- -
The pea"-- y z..r
ei: ::o:ri::: bclm-. i . ':.'able 6 .
1
, ·ould oc subs·.:,:mtiJ.lly reduc d u ,c>::.· t>.i
- I
.sc::cd·..ile &n
-~o.: .T~~ts


 : e pea, · :..~1::c-.: ;.:-;on


locc.::. :~:_:i::ycrs would be co-rros:_:)ondingly lc-s.
~cc~.:,1:::x;_,E'.) c:o:..;y:y :JA:~.=- 'TS
'i'~bl.e 6 .


'.~TES,


~ ..
'.:(':'_\ i:.8XD :' ;_;~"~ .t
~:illage Rai:8S
F..:l to:1
Cou::1:y


..909


~.::~ J
l
7 ' -
1S72
197.S
-
~.::,
- .::,
2 .0
2.0
2.5
Dc::z.:.. o
County



. . 0





.. .0


l ,489
5,698
6 ,0:!.5
7,629
8 ,06Ll8, 526
9,033
9,570
8,459
8,973
8,893
S, 93
2,054


..S16


3 .0
19-:'7
-_ :J,O
."
3.0
1.4
l.v
1. 6
, ·'
..L. v
. o·,


-:i .0


1.6
3.0
2.5
2.5
1. 3
-.
?
~
$1,081
1,15S
1,367
4,324
3.0
~ ~~2
$ ?- , 7sc·•
u.:>
2,925
De . ~a.lb
Co:11:·c '
4,098
1975
.:.903
~'11 ~~0:1
Co~:1:y
l.. l
~-4
-? . ::,-


.;vo


Lella:: A,,,ounts (000)
1 • ..,.
' _
J..
1974
~., I -:J
..\XD :,:ILLAG:::
·:--:.·rv::::s
l.S
•
?
l.~
.)
1.::.
2.2
1.1
2,169
2,751
2,907
3, 0 7 .~
3,257
3,453
3,0:o
3,235
3,206
3,206
c::·.cse level ::::-.m. . a..t. pay:::c::·::.::
tot: e co~ple-.:e ret::.~c~e::~ o~
bo::d issues bcginhi~ 0 i~ l~ 7~
_,
- -;.j tt~ ..'iMER.GAEEl\E.:: , 1. . n ;..ss:JCI
......
�_ di\,-.·_.- 'u· :··
~
1. ....,
• l .... _
--
""'"Y_.,.. (., 1t 11
l . o· · 0,- ·
.~
-L1..- .. .i...J...,..
-t~:.iction, ··
·,IJ
V.-
ow
"" ..
~
. . .. V..J
..,_
i;· .~i.:2.·;: or, Coun~y \•1oul ·
.~O--Sc..


i2' ·


c .. 11
co . p~.rc:..bl8 p1·0!!.:.::ty oh· .. cr in oc;Co.l' Cou . t y wo:.! :
ly y0 . J · .'.lssu.
mo. ·.· c
i......
r of a ~20,000
.)S . 00
01
-
v:::..1.---.~,


.J.S


1
g t u.t
s s:o~n,
8'..::c!::.b 's :-:,:cc c.ssc · -..1c, t is a::..so t,O pe::ce::,t of
I . ·;: 1.,_
in :?u ton) .
t .c average
pay
'10;:,e





o-:
c.::s
nea'., ·cax ir:;pz..ct ( ~975 - 7, J,
o ·m ·• i:-. 8c.ch co,mty wou ld stil:'.. tc
st,
·he following sc .ed l · :
De:'alb
. '.a.·imun raillc:.ge
needed for ~--~ T
bond financing
3.0
Yc::.:..·s of maxi nu:.
-. ..,:
1.6
197S- 7
1 75 - 79
A..'1nual co s·c of
r.1axi1au ,l r,1i.ll ge ·.:o
owner of home wi ·.:h
r.iar<et v alue of :
~15,000
..,20,000
,_.12 . 00
~:.8 . 00
$ 9 . 60
~25,000
~24 . 00
l2 . 0



n Cna"?.·t II, later, the i ..pact or tn.s~




r::::.. _ lage :..·ates upo.
z. wic.c.:·
.
v:::-opcrty owi crs is sho·.v:1 cc:,.pared Hi·c.1 t he si. 1,..:::- :.!:"."J.::c-~



-:ip::.-... ·.:ra:1..;i t fina'"lci;ig under al tern ti vc systec.s .




Cor."'-r.e_ c ial c:., d i:1 ,..:::,-
total b::.. __ _
~riz..2. p:-opc:-ties, of c ours , would pay~ !&rge pc. t of
TJ;-_-\:;r ·c::c: schedule of paym :its
t forth ~:)ave, most r.oi::e o;-n:eTs i:-!. ::-~:. ·.: - __
Cc,a:-.-.:y Wc-uld pay substc..ntially less fr.a:: ~:::e - tcn·.:h of
L~r~et
v~~
e of their property £or
t~~
-
p.:;~ce. ·..:
0:10
cc~~t~uction o_ ~.e
....- ........-.
-.
.......
.
.... J.. ......
.;
-
·-
....
- 44 hAMMi:R
OR::
NE
.J,l-..~A.J~,;:


.•::i


�ye:..:·,
cl .•
·-
C "-3. ..
.-.2 ..... __
.:.:J


.-.0




'::.:1c.I1c.:..·, by GO Bo;cC::s




co;:: e:1·.::i or.al
l 'Vi e· c~:..::.:1st as sesse
c0:::s ·c::.1:.:·.::i0 ...,.l lioita"Cior
·:::~re would be



i.nc. ::)




-:·:.:o
cos·.:.
u..
L.
ODV .:.ous
advar.t2._,c to ·.::::c
cou .ti~s in meeting the counties
.• er.ts, u.:·.;.:.11.y carry a lm·.r
3ond cvUJ s 1
ctho
·l:.c cs a ccili::i.g uuon tht: ~r.o...: .. -:: o= GG bo .. ds
c:
·_~;,cse bon s , based upo
1
-::h
oi GO oo·.-:ds cy :'.'Jl tcr-
USC
oblig::..t::o s for 1!A. '; ' - cc:""J::i.:al
~ull fai ·_:: and c:redi t o:: · occ:._
-=-
,~:·:-:. -
i terest rate ~ha~ bonds is u d by s~~c:~ stir::c1tes · ·c;
r2.t'. er than the ~~RTA channels
s:.:.vings £rori
be as
as
c:.\..,
-.,.,;;_·c._,,,t o .. t'.c ir:teres'c ch3.rgc, uh::.ch c0u:!.a . ..)O.n a saving o= :.s ~- :..:: ..
. :s,~uO,GOJ ove~ t! e ycaTs on -::he projcc1:cc ::.s~ 1 es of $199,000 . '




o






30-Y--=-:·
oonds are esL.::1atcd -~o ·1ave: :: pote .'.::ial .:.nte~es
ra-c.e c:::
=c· _.
co ... Jared "i th a foer ar..d one - h::.lf percent e t::.--:-.3.te for
iss:..:c
J
•
H A f ! f..l
R
O n _ .. N 1.:
J
1 •
~


.


,.
" ...
~.;:,
---
1 •
�t.18
'- . i..
.,,.,..,,_
.....


r


•. • 1,.., 1,,.,.,v
,.,..._ _i
ot!-:c.1. :Lnd,
C"
,.:1,/,...-..• ,. ._ ,.. --~c
c..- . LL_J.d.1,,,,., ..J
r r
.___.__,
...;<.-L
,.L.
·::..v b c~::J."'". . ,sc..._ u:J (...__;2-:_~s·t: ·..::·_3 Oc!:.L ~a:-J(;.C~ ..~:...:..; Jl
._;_~: . govc:--1:ri12:1.-c _ T\~s .s::.::-,):..:,, ... ca:·~s (...::.~-.: r0- J · C "~:.. . ~::s:.:. · :c:..:.~c..
··: i..:11..- ,._~\'0
1
OL: co:r.:)c·c i:--:J di r ec::ly ·_.;_~·.:>. s·c---:: ""::s, sci·:oo!s, :::,a::.·>::;, \,~'c e:-,
S w~C - ~~ci 0 ~~ 8~ p~j! · c .~o2s ~O~ C~~it~ i I ~CS,
c:
• ...,
.,_,.
_.,, r
-~.:.~s a ·c -~:1~ ~.1. csc~-..-t ti1·:~e:, Jo-~.: ~-.:!.\re J.c:, l.o;
r~-.j~ ~ ~~--OU:ttS of C:.":~::city ~V~i~.::.~le ::or :_. . ~}i
·c::-~!1S:_'- \;~::_::_ ;:o~
j~ 1143.215.248.558
~noug~ . 0 COV0T :
,0
~~
.....
.1 _
.... ..__
- ·-
..... ._J
.
)TOjCC~2
L..._s....:Lss~ · 1::: :c:.~.
_·c .. Ol.:..n. b~ d::.r~icult t SC.! wC:u::.e ·c' .8 is s1.:a:-:: e o:: GO bc:-.d.,, ·t.o
the Tccui"'" e:-r.8nts o:E t} e 1~ ----~-' d:-a·,.·down chedule.



 :·.:nsi t bon · nc c! · ·..:ou~-- !13.VS ·co '.)c co:,s::.c.e::.·~J as p~:-t of




1:..... g~r pL:Jl ic is ·1:es ccrJeYin ...~ ~ v~::~i~:y o::' the:-- l ca ~ go·:~T:.. ,c. t nee s . 7! c:·...; is a:, un e::3tand:::ble re:uc;;a::1cc o:: ov":.· .. ~c t - ~-d~ s :o ~o to tl c uco~1~ wit~ p ~oposa: s ~or CJ bo:::
iss· cs ·coo f r cqu · ·· ly .
2.



-l0ct




0
_,:~ + -- .
.,;._- t.... ~-....,
C:::..-ce wi l app,:ov GO bond iss;;.es :.:or apid t:-::ns it . _:-: _:.g .:·.:
oI the size of _api<.. trc:i1sit :.· ec.uircn :.ts, it would::::,-:: _c...



. .. possib l e to r.:eec: al! o: '.:i -:.S..: nee.is fr. ou.:l:




s i ng2. .:;J ".Jc::-.:
issue , ad thi s 1\·01..ld requi e s..10seque ·c vo'·es oy tr..e -"-.!o::;·c f::,r
1.-:" .ic:~ no pri or
c o::uni t . ent could be :-:;.ade
the K:U T co:-:c:,.·_c·.:.
~'..
~~A GOCS
,ot, of COt.YSC, : av-::
O:vT:.
~!J:..e to levy i ts own t ax 01 property wi·.:·1i:-. thc Tc..)id ·c::-c.isit ciis·.::.·ic-.:, :.:s
~or:c. isst.·s wold
1~v
t,
c st tus of. GO bonds .
~=-e iss~-d, they wust be i s s ues o
'
.'"\.::,
·- CJ


.ocally,


S:....:-. L·J.:-:c::..s c o for t. e B..:y Arca Rapid T::-ar.s::.. t Syste.i .


)O:::c.::;


the loc~l govcrr.m-;-:t.
a.lreacl.y r:otcd, there is not in prospect~ s 1fi::.2i nt bo~-i:::;
.·"uli:o:-, c.nd Je.' al'.) c ounties to .. zct th3 full :.·e u1re::-.en·cs
o::
....
~
\... 1..-
...
~
,-
,.. ... ~-
-- -
t.:2sJ ~'---·::.s -
·~io .. s
.s·c ~.:.:.i.. •. l un sei1 CJ.~~ci ti



,




...............1
be.:
1-::c\:
S,
hOi·/c:\'1;;.1.' ,
..,
....
-'-
l
p~rt
3St
or
t~~
·.._ -1 ....
- ~.
...
\.,_
.
. . . . . . . . .:::,
.1.ro~.1 ti1is sourc-. - -.. :;H
~ 1,1


t.~


R
J " ... h :
., . • • ·"'
• ., S ... ;


. • • ..,


•'....
I..,
\..
�"
...
.l. ....
1-::: · c:1
cc:J
c:. t:,r
. ~-
O "\f
~
lO yec..:..s
.,.
$3G,
' -·,, .. , i ·1 rr
1.,.1,..;._ --:
0
is lles
a.s $60,C"0,0C0
c, _
dd
.:L~l:> County h::.s unuscC:: bon.diI,g ca:)c.city oi c.'.)out $30,000,JCC
c..,, _ _ ..
1ar.::i..:.al::.y is i:-:c:rcc:s.:.,1g by c::.bo1.,:t $2,500,C0C, 1·.>,:;.(..;_ would acd a..10·:::1.c _ $25,CJG,
o·,er
Do:alb also h~s
the near £utuJ.·\:;.
-r~'--
. - ..... -.........v.- " c- ........
- ...... --....
~
-
J_
.i ••
is
·0:-1.c - :-.c:.._:: :,.e c...:.:,.__,t that ~:..\}TA wou::.d .ccd ~~G:.:. this co~,-::y.
cou:cts, ri.11.:.r.:;; o::: casL.s now beio:-e
Georgia nust :..,o
0;1
..... ,e
J.sscss;;:cnt ::olls c..--.: .:CJ
- --
tc.te cons1:.:::.~~1:i~:::.
, ....--
·:, .....
-
... ~ _..1 _Jvi_.:,.,
,..
-· .....



. .,~ :.c ...




... _.._.,1,.J..._ ....
• ,J
t~e bond.:::.ng caJacitics
as .~ceting othe_



eecs .




-~-71-i ,.. ••• :•. .. " . (j
nE



t1 ... 5 I l C ri




,.. .., ... C .;
I
....
7 :
�ii
ii
.!
')
,)
•, I
' )
u
(
)
t, )
(:
~
,l :
·r i
I
()
Jl
\
l )
d
,:
'1
d
., I
(.)
L~



-,




'0
f..{
1:
(j
•, I
')
<.,)
IJ)
I~
0
~





j
(')
t )
0
.r~


i


'D
f-<


j


0
0
<:
I
., J
()
· ,i
<)
0
.'~
(J
';
l!
· ,i
1
. I
()
1



~




Cj
")
,-~
r~
·d
4-;
! '
~
"J


.;



()
,0
C)
0




.,






~)
\J )
(j
VJ
0
~- I
cl
I:•)
(.)
·c-i
'I
1;
,,
)
()
r··•
r~
'" ,J


1f


1/J
(~
'./J
<)
· cl
()
p
r.:,.
~- ~
C.'.)
p
,,
'/J
'd
cJ
()
r.
<')
~<
(j
!j
(.)
~1
>-..
(j
r,
,"
t;)
•f ~
~:
C)


>


l
0
l
•JJ
()
,.,.,
{J
C)
'/)
.,;
(J
,- 1
•cJ
tl
()








r,
.J
'I
I J
<l
~"'~
(l
f~
· cl
1/J
r(,
0,
,0.
jJ·
1:
.,;
'/J
·, I
'/)
'd
r:
0
-')
<I
"Y
!j
<:)
.. r~
~J


j


0
OJ
()
,,
' .)
.·; J:
t:-;
0a
0
r·
d
()
!:
rJ
"J
()
f..:
., I
,t:
VJ
IJ
'I
•1)
,J
,!. !
I;
to
s:
•.-!
(.)
r:!
rJ
i::::
· ·,-i
'+ I
u
f;
0)
r:
~
H
t!)
,. c:
p
•rl
rJ
•tJ
>
r;
0
>
r:
•, I
1/J
·rl
'l
,.f )
., I
'./J
'1 )
OJ
,. ,
0
j.J
P,
r~
~{
f:
'ti
(l
<cl


J


'Cl
.,-;


J


,· I
(.)
cl
H
fI
ri


1


rJ
,0
<l
' I
,-{
., ;
d
>-..
<+..;
p,
•,J
d
>..
i.J
r.:::


5


0
..
cj
<J
,.5
1/J
()
.J
r~ ~


J


tJ
p
!.:
d
'.1
f;
q I
0
CJ
tH
1. ,)
f~
. I
(.)
1-:
cJ
, .J


.,



f;
,J


J


H
..~J
't:I)
., ;
.<. :
.µ
rJ
1..:
' tJ"
<\)
fl
•"/)
,l
" j·
I
,-1.--:
iJ
. i
Cl)
u•
fl
Vl
r~
cl)
,--,>..
I1
' I
f;


j


tl


.,



.~
u
,0
r::
()
"
U')
, ;J


j


p
'/J
('j
(.)
·rl
.µ
· rl
r::
f~
,J
.-'-~
.µ
., I
,ct
VJ
r I
~:l
t- J)
r.(.
()
'U
()
l"--
to


..:

J


,:
·rl
".)
p..
.,
~
0
()
j.J
)








H
'd
•c.J
w
'l j
·d
(i
«
rJ
'd
CJ
t' 0
.<
0
r)
f,
cu
>..
\'.;
cJ
p
•')
,· ;
·rl
.,;








.'!
, ' ")
,! )
1/l
rl
()
! :
11
>..
1!.)
11
0
(
.J
-,
r.::
1- i •
.
(
~
iJ
~;
d


1


r::


J


1/J
0
rJ
' <J
~.)
r•
•rl
·1-j
(j
-r~
r,
f·t
,,:J
()
jJ
0
<!1
<: ~
·,i
rJ
fl
j.J
,c.:
(i)
ru
,Cl
' I
0


j


1')
.-' ~
,J )
~I
,J
fl
.l)'
(.)
'fl
l;


-:::


-~~
0:
(1)
(.)
4.J
r"
C)
r~
.'
!:
()
OJ
'I
0)
r:
1:
(\.I
1~·
()


J


,J
0
rJ
,<:


.'"
;


'/J
to
I~
•rl
0
n
<')
~ 1
•, I
H
OJ
('j
,! :
f-1
0
""
u
t,)
<1)
Q)
C)
I,1'
0



J




'lJ
VJ
</)
~)











VJ
•ri
'd
.'"...
<' )
Ll
p
0
r,
,()
t!)
,,
<1)


J


p
~)
0
' I
., I
OJ
0
rl
(j
1:1)
1/J
(.j
r I
' ;
., I
·r l
~""l 4
· rl
~
>-..
,.J
()
0
,' )


- I


(:)
·, I
'/)
JJ
')
'
~u


J


p
r~
--·
f,
·, ·)
1/J
,r,
d
Pa
()
>-,
', :)
11)
,, I
r !
I
<J
fi
()
r~ }


J



j


.,·
f;
,".-:


J


I,:
., I
'd
0
,r:
·r l
.,
()
()
p
111
r.;
~' ~
u


1


f' ,
rJ
0.)
-~
,.
['


i


0
' ·,
<J
•)
I!
'/J
u
,t :
,_,)
·u
0
fl
' I
, r:
JJ
"
rf)
] )
1/J
,, J
0
()
j )
1:








..,-;
0
J
f.:
()
·d
p
I-~
(j
,.L-:
! :
,, {
j
0
'Tj "
~
t I
()
rl
,1
r '
.-
,-\-:
()
()
s:' ,
f"...
rJ


I


0
~-~
•')
..,'/J
0


.-~


rJ
,·I
';
0
f;
<)
f1
l1


'5


,' )
0,
f1
'/J
.,- l
,,
·~j
0
r>
p~
1
,-::· :
j
,(')
u
'
'
,•1
'U
.~
t-:
<' )


j


0
I
p
•r l
(" I
'l
I
()
•, J
ii
,,J
il
•I
r:
J
,:)





!J
VJ
•J
')



.:




()
'i
c·,o
•c i
u)
1:
J





1:
()
()
'
't )
C)
,t :
0
()
r:
~


i


~0
•c l


.i


, ;
j;
~·:J
()
'I
1/J
i::::
•, I
r!
U)
~~
•l
' I
'i
1:
•:)
.,.
l








<:..;
0
()
J
'I
(l
<')


1


')
f;
I
I


5


>-,
t')


--::


,)
'I
,J
d
,.
':J
()
<)
• )
I.)
•1 I
• j
(j
•J


J


�•,./
.
J-c.,'.',_~
CG·_::·_·,vy
l. s
~969
1970


.972


_]7-.:,
.,
.) :,; 1.
6) ::.20
. 6 ,-,- ~
- . ..,
6, ..,, 0
7, ~ 70
-:-
-
l. 3


.4


l .2
__ ::,
")


. . 3


_ . lvV
~-3
2.l
~.o


.%2


83
2. 0
1.9
1.0
.9
-1 , ·:,.........?
,~
,J-,
. . . -:
l. .:.
1
$:!.,~SO
,·
~-5
C:
..)
.,
=
~
v __ ._,
-.·,-.20
-.. ,. 65/
)
i ~;77
. _; ·; J
,,...
l._
l. 1
-J ..-7 . ::,--1 .


/6


1..~ ,-.:
L/,..J J
2.0
2.0
_7 _::,-


. 0 7 -:.


l :) 5
'\


.c



. . s



.<.J7:


-
l.G
_·l.~- ·.::,).1
Cc·.·..-:·.:: :r
! , 5--.-:
1,65,.
2,26C
2, -. i 6
2 .,- . J2
7 C' - - ,JuJ
2, 72c
7,568
8,000
2, 33--.-
8, :. 2 :;.
8, 2::;;.
7,S.~9
i;,025
2, 9:=:9
2,958
2,S'iO
8,076
(T!:c


,__e; fG 1


p3.y,-:1.Jr. . ..:s
~=-~: ·is
.. ~... L::: _
1:0 ·:: ..... e
c~~.: -
~eti~e143.215.248.55 ~
bone.
i.
is ·cc be


10"'.:c~


~
o:
s1..e · • -:: g::.;1 _
<'97)
·~:-:at
',•::.>:....._ .....
. - ...............
t,· --.- ·- ....
JOr,d ::.ssues.


. s


already

~- .. -....- ..
.-. .,.. r
is .;sed as
eross ra::. e
A3
c beco:.:.se
~
,-.., -
,-
~
.:.s:S .:.v_"' .: ... 2
~ionc ·, ~o~ever , :~e rcciucc: ~ill-~-


.-·" o 1.......- o .r ... ng ,.,
.• _s c::. -:::.c tc..
-
,_
ir.1!)..1..:t oi the r:-,::ixirr.~ .. , ... ill:::g0 u.-:d;:·_· GO bon-..'. ..:::..::....-:-: ~::..,., .. ::c:
......
...I ' '
~
.-S:
\
�2.5
l.
1973 - 78
E, 73 - 7~-
$Li . 00
~lS . LJ
s
20 . 00
25 . 00
.,=.0 . 00
~:Z S. CO
$~i . 20
A:-.nu;:i.l cos·c o::
r..c.._.,e-:: v· 1 ,:) oi :
2 . ~~o
.;::.i. . 00
~h 0 ;r::o · e c-::c d gr o ss a:r..d :1et ·.:: :::x cig,3s ·cs/c:sed. 2.s a oas i s i or 2.::. 2. c-=
·;::.~_2


ocoi~c..:io~ c~ Aoo~oaches



. s


0£ c ourse:,
..,ovc :.:n;::c . ·
t -,
- ....~
·-
•• • C;
..... J
2.~·;::
-
"'\
. I,,..,
t~cir obl ::.. ~2.tio~s
L .
t~:e c ollect::..0:1
_· t s ·stem
I,,...,,
··--.._
-
......
c, _
· ssu;ln c e o f~ P~ bonds
,:;stG.°biis: ing MA~~.\ cl ·-;;.:::!.y rcco~izcd this poss::.bili ·;::y, ::..s =o __ '·
,,. ::.oc:.il govl!rnxcnt mJ.y ,::.Ect ;...n.y :.:c·)-.c~ ·):rovid.cc i;i tr.. ::.. s
s~c:io~ to finan ce ~h~ pa-.::~icip:::-::ion ::aqui~cd of i-:: i n
1...: vl · or i , p<.1r , and the :!. ..: ction of or;c methoJ si,a::.:!.
r:ot p:.·ccl de the lee ti on a: .s.:10-:::.2r :.. ~·cJ-.o<.: 11.:.. .:. :-csc1yc-;::
't .. c-.:~to o-.:: wi 1:.1 respect -co a •.y &.00.::.\: ional or su.,Y;::i.:.. --r:-:.:;:-1i.::a::-y
fii..:.:·-:...:.~ipatio:1 dcte1--::1ined ·::o be r:~cess:::ry . .
- + ..
uv-..
--.0
)O:.-~ •
,_
\..
...
•~
? .• _·:on and De'.'al:::> cour:ti-.:s in (.;,T.):..oyi .. g bo .
t .. c use o~ o.vailc:.blc GO bond co.paci-cy
i .. ".lrove::.e;1t needs .
I
\Ii~
tr.e cor:s--.~:.:;;;m: s:::.~.:"
HOUlC
-50 -
Ht,f'-.. M ..
n
Cr\
....
t., • • ,,
,.. __ ..,.,,,...
�l, __ ._.._.._...
cou
·-J...------'-'- ....
.....
l- _. (... __ _ :, ..... :..
-
u
, .
t,:e
r
t:. ~.i
isst:.Js
.':'.:
.
, .
SC ... C;~:.,.._(;.
··---
~ - - .::>
,:i.nce :::. GO' o~d issc:.e f:::.ils (cz- vo.:. ' :.: :...:,::.:.:o.r..11 is ,.o·.: ::-cce::..ve;:l :::o:- ·.:.::.:;
by
'T'
e
.


-o-os .: . ·::.::..o:--. ··


bo, c.s or .::cough a , Lla[;
t
CO:.lL-
....
l ·vi e;ci io:·
a.C:
\,., ....... ..>
....... ....:.e
•
V
... ,.. ........t,.., ., • ........
'
• • \.,,:)
- v ....... -.
as to w
c
•'--
a_. ,-..
~pJ:::ov~l of the ]ropos.::..tio
C:::::s t·.c discretio
- ...
.::,_,,..._,
rout
to ~ollm· in rr.eeti. g '.:'. .c ~-'· •• .
•
..'.:"-·~,_u..;:-:.·.:::.y ::.s.5t:ed without incurring a ·.:ax r.:..::..se sim:?lY ::,ccause ·.:::.e r-:;·_.:._-..: .::~.-.:.
er C---- _&r.~--•.:: iss~es ar.d the increase
GOv:::.:_.., -'-' tl.- •• osorb
-
\........, _ _ _ .1_..>
vould , of co~~sc, re'.:.ai .
_e;""
.
_...,._,~·.,.:,
additional serv .:.cc cha_ 6 ~S
-S >
i thin t:.e e.·:..s-ci.
0




ai.:es.






�::.s
uo _ , go-.r.;; :.:·.·-·· -~ -: .::; · '-... , . ··- -· ·- ---·::.s
(
c, :.:
-· i r.- '"'\.
---...-,- - -
I SC.~.Ju.··
. - -~
- c:
I
sue~-..
,. .: :
e-::.::. -__ ,_,. ., _ .,.._



_90 9 ·.:0~_:.




~a !Jo:-.C:.s
or:
yc:_:.."'S (
..:-:;;_
- ..........
- ~.,._ - _,. -
·'- J-· . . ...... _- JC
- :::::. ::.1
T ,.,
,., ..,
.,..
\_,.;....
....
... c..,.. _ .....
cos:
-:,,
C .....
. .... .-,
c~:-s)
s~~:;e
2.
GO bona 1,::
or
tre $35,0) GG
(
-.~
\
'--V- - .,_
• _ ""'\ 1,,\.
_,_
1 c_
\
r:i::.l l
.'0
'-'-


.r.e


dit>.:.st,
I
'J pcn~1 .
~
o~ ot~-r ~ina~ ci ~::.
be covc~cci a::.l or i.
p2.rt by
c ,..::c:;es :::i
001
d lcv::.:c:s ::::.·.·e:c.dy ou'o:st.an
g.
tu~. pro~ose ~o t~e , .......... ,.
-4.VL.....,_
·.:. :.."'J.!~S.: t
~J~
,...,
~---,,
-V~
c:a-cio., is
~
.
ea _· ie:.. .
co:-ol l~:::-y
possible, of course, to m:.·c :.~y ~rccise
__ :;:.'.;.·.:.~o:-. .3 of
.
~
s:.ou::.d oc t!"',e c .·cl..1 iv;; so~rc~ oi flL1Cs ~o:
_,-..:c _)0:ct y


s


T ::.s reco:-,1.
.
~
0£
combina.c:ic,n approact .
~OY
t:1e :V_'
RTA bo .d roi;t e, 2..--:d ::. ·,: COl.• ::. J b
less
i...., .. _ _ ,.
jcnd fi~ancing.
___
ll A l! f.1
f h
. _., o::
., H , f r.; t


i ,


[ .,
A. •
•
�l·)
(
l:
,,
,I
r)
J
I
()
·,)



1




<:
I
,)
0
/J
'
I


l


r·,
..1;, .
.;


j



J


c• l
I;
()
':.i


j


<fl
" i


>


0
•c,
,J
_,



l




r:'1
>-.
(!
•.J
f;
0


,)


~.
<J
.)
f'"" (
J
I
()


·-<


~ .!
')


J


•.J


i


'J)
)
,J
0
r,
'J
')
')
'J)


,



'j


•)
' '

cl
,,,,
r:J


-j


,.,
I)
"'r.
0
C,)
1>
<)


,,:


~
IJ
~:
·.l
'
I
l-:
· ,,
<i;
0
>-.
U)
,.
I
r
v1
)
,,J
rl


j


)


,


0
>}
·rl
>!
J
0
., I
0
f,
Q)
P,
.. 1
()
iJ
,-


J


r-l
-: J
~
cl
~
C)


J


i'


..-!


r' :
.t:
r.:
~"\ -i
(J)


,


d
<H
n~
•,--1
r,
i-:o


5


f;
~:l
'./)
f·-t
()
t)
.-



,...




(j
,...,
Y. '
.
rJ
iJ
•,-1
jJ
"'
f l
>-.
!J
1-·


3


0
u
r:
·rl
('. ~
•1j
/, )
<l
.
rJ
p
>-.
,J
r;
r:
cl
,-,



l





J


•'.
0
u
JJ
r.
d
~
0
p
jJ
'u
~)




I






'\.J
>-.
•,J
rJ
' ($
0
()
{ ,J
,.! )
CJ
r;j
~)
()
.c:
(j
(/)
(j
.r::


.J


1-i
I
r
0
C)
(J
.,
~
r~


l


0
u
0



.:



J


0
·'p ~


l


(1)
r,


J


,.
\()
')
')
,,:
cJ
p
,,>-.








0
(:)
•j
q{
,<!
IJ
t



"'1 4




P,
•tJ
0
fl
f"' 1
<)
' I
r..
0,
r:
., I
C)
0
11 ,
0
f-1
cJ
Q)
-, --i
•·;
,•;
'1 J
..a
(j
';
'--i
i~O
cj
cJ
,,
>
cJ
ft
•)
f~
' ;


J


u")
fI
'd
(J
S1
1:J
</)
f;
CJ
cj
u
Cl)
'H


l


'u
fJ
I~
f)
>
rJ
()


.;


r:
0
u


J


'./)











C)
r~
f/1
';
0,
(j
cJ
C)


J


' I
' I


l


0
?~
'd
,')
r;
1· 0
•,I
</)
C)
'0
(J
rj
u
r(
H
r!)


'"'.(


(.")
'°
{Jj
f;
<')
>.
fJ)



l




C)
')
f~
., I
rl
!;/)




I






1--:
i:..,,
()
,()
,}
If)
p
r)
4J
u
~
80
(')
fl
1::


J


u
u
c,j
I
r
~1
··rl
'.;:
()
<,)
j l
•rl
ti ~
0
•d
<H
0
l/)
lH
~~
r~
~ J
()
,J


l


()
,-;
IJ
~
,r,
r::
·rl
u
p
>
()
t.J)
p
rJ
I;
).;
•,;
c.l
.")
p
l/)
0
f1
~"" I
iJ
fj
fl
j l
f<
iJ
C)
·d
( <
')
'<
rJ
H
l/)
cJ
<!-1
. ri
0
)
~.
0
<H
c-;l
p
~





0
')


.



"
jJ
G
r -1
,J
<(,


J


..,.
-
•r l
f~
cj
'r'
~


)


'r~
p
r:



l




0
u
"1:l
(...!
,:
..,.
r l


J


I
JJ
cJ
0
{J
r:::
•rl
.o
~
0
"U
tl}


>


f~
~
C)
>-.
µ
r:
cJ
•)
C)
()
~
)
.:!
0
.c-:
(;)
If)
,, I
·rl
~-:-:
r:::
<i3
p
0
·r--i
<fl


J


<fl
l/)
~)
>-.
,, J
>-.
,·J


J


I~
·, I
n.
(')
J
•,j
....(
~
u
,.i
~;,
<:l
f-4
>
0
u
f I
·' )
·u
-J
·1
(j~
cJ
f·t
(!)
~:;
p
p
rJ
r i
.o
c(j
' i
,J
i>



l




1)
r•
"1j
•r·l











'H
r I
d
!·I
!,. ;
1/)
c-l
•rl
i-:o
d
(!)
rl
·rl
r~
l/)
()
,f
~
,J
<.fl
r--i
,J
~
r::
r~
~j
r·
cd
r.::
0
H
0
r:::
rl
iJ



-..




,-;
C)
•d
'T.I
,J
0
jl
r:
~j
,, i
'/)
l
r
d
"'
0
u'
•')
'.l
)
)
0
r• .
'i;)
~5
0
~
r..;
,J
cil
µ
c-;l
~)
0
..a
.j. J
,.c.:
0


1


<i1
0
,, t
~'I
.~
.µ



l




c;j
()
.
'C)
H
m
,:
l/)
·r--i
.c:
p
,0
G)
I
rl
1')
0



.:




C!)
0
CJ
r
~
'I
,')


l


d
<)
'<


J


~


.0


': J
•r-1
.. j


-
;I'


,:
• t
"l
·,j
t•)
,.,
r-
.l
' )
.J
cl
. l
u
'·
., I
ff
'~
<-l
';
li
0
,:
!J
/'r
I - ~
~
(!)
"'
0
·<
l/)
c-;l
rl
!;
r..


J


(;)
I )
.,.{


~


~")-t
C>
()
fl
,;
C!)
.J
\,)
0
"'
u:
>-.
' i
j
,)
P,
0
0
iJ
r:
,'1
•.J
iJ
~..:,
<)
'/)
C)
H
0
j
..r::
,,
~)
'--.J
•.J
1/)
r1.
r::
·d
c-:l
>
cj
If)
fJ
i.::
Q
>
0
I
Q)
0
c,J
,J
u
H
r -1
•rl
"
,c
,, i
..0
0
•1~1
r;
· r i
' J
I
C' I
0
{-l
[i
"J
,-..
r,
<J
JJ
r'
,:.l


~


,.
0
f;
P1
'I
f~
•r--i
~t
·u
., t
r1
0
t)
'1
t'
'I)
,J
•r;
ll


J


·-:.
•')
'.;
.r:
1!
>.
...
0
~)
,c:
,;
'I
.µ
ti")
•rl
,r)
(1)
,.c:
1)
I
(',
, j\
')
ii
fi
0
<)
ft
• I
j
0-
nI
,/')
,1
C)
1./)·
9
' i
0
•')
.t--:·
,.c:
u
I
<' )
0
u
~
.J
'
0
p
()
fi)
r.
rl
,,
'l
·0
·d
cJ
4--t
~-1


J


..,.d
•rl
r:!
(!)
<l)
>-.
.J.)
(l)
.~
·t :
,.c.:
l/)
H
C\l
0
.,-;
(j
p
(5
,, J
' .1



l




P~
r.
-
f=i
~)
·u
0
d
·-
·d
,J
,.;
µ
0



l




f-~
?,:
..__,
,--;
•rl
..r~
p
cj
I
CJ
' i
ca
0)
,-;
..a
......
()
r --i
'I
ri
•rl
<fl
lJ)
•)
CJ
J'.'"l
ti)
(, )
(' )
d
~~
rJ
,. I
')
jJ
'/}·
(J
·d
r,
6()
r•,
•rJ
0
' i
'<
0
0
.l
' I
,-t
"'
'1


....,


U)
rl
~ ·•
Q)
•.J
G
0
0
0
r::
C)'
<.I)
<fl
,;y
~.;
()
,-1
,-i
()
')
,...
d
. .c.:
('J
' 'l
d
1:)
<fl


,._,


rI1


.__


•'>
1:
'<1
,J
p
r{~
'1)
·,I
"'
r l
jJ
.fJ
r:
1)
( -_)
U)
0
r-'i
,•::
,t ~
•rt
,;i
0
µ
C)


J


p
,J
p
.t:
.~
·,;
•')
., I
,')
u
'<1
ff)
<)
t
>,
cJ
~)
'/)
•'1
!.:
0
0
1/)
r l
(j
( '



l




u
0
'1J
•r I
'U
r:
>-.
0
,: ~


J


!J~
0


J


I
>-.


J


iJ
!' ):
>
/)
r1
~"If
!:
., I
'! l
<"1".
,0
,)
.; i
r.
,,J
,-,
(!)
•')
.J
,.


J


i,
l
u
,:
j l
0
<I)
r~
P,
C)
H
<i--1
,
'I


J


(j
()
()
0
ff)
~1


~


IJ


J


0
r-1
·r l
'./)
,C·
r:
()
,, I
C)
r)
tH
H
l/)
jJ


,


0
.µ
,,
>,
r-:
0
f~
")

()
~:
()





jJ
.µ
.-: !
p
'I
u
l/)
,- 1
p
·d
·rl
',J


J


</)
<J
r.::
il
>,


1


c, I
r::
tJ
rJ
' i
' I
If)
· rl


)


<)
r,
0
.r~
<
1; )
0
'-!{
p
I I


J


,' :
nJ
•l.J
'.fl
r i
't
i<
>-.
>-.
>
cJ
p
~:
')
J
rJ
fa
,_ j
·d
.r:


J


c-J


J


0
i_j
,'7
/)
r -i
,J
()
. I
jJ
l/)
,IJ


.:l


.,-,
cJ
0
I)
r..
>,
,-;
u
,- 1
ry
I!
I~
()


..



,,
p
'U
(j
r.
·r l
.,~
~,
fL1
( )
j
r,~ ~
•c l
,- 1
()
' <
·a
,, t
·J
~)
jJ
1--i


,



,._,


jl


J



J



,


,- i
,-;
(j
q
,'.)
':i
'/)
()
!"j
'/)
., I
1-'
!~
·, I
l
I~


)


r;
,--' -:


,


<:1
d
~)
<J
cl
jJ
0
fl.i
•, I
C)
IJ
1--t
,j
,.
rf-j
<J
·rl


J


•,I
(_)
,.
,':
U)
•i i
I
' I
jJ
/1
d
'.:)
..',,
()
J
0
<' )
0
,, I
Q)
0
1)
I
u
u
0
r-'·
rJ
·<
'I
•f)
Ul


J


.f's:
{)
'
' ;
' <1
' -I
r!
<1 1
1/)
,:
l/)
<:
Ct)
'.)
. I
r )


s



J


1:
,J
0
•J
.,
,j
r,
-: 1
r,
'I
0
i5
., I
•,1
-d
' I
U)
.-•
· 1·{
1,1
()


J


,, -1
,.'.-:
r--l
( :-1
Cl
0



..._




~ I
"
C)
?:
·,J
' Q)<
l:
r:
J
(,>


-,..,


1:
,J


,'


., I
r,
j l
! 1
,- 1
~)
,.l)
I
t'1
LI)
i
�:: . . ·. . .. . . .y
sy.:,~ ... ~- '.·.~ ·---·... . . ~
~
"'"'i""'- '._.., ...-.,
-
c::. .... .
•
•
-
r
,
-
- - - ........ C....-
.,._
vvv
-v ._::-_.I ,
'--...1J • ..,
~..,..,
l
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Op
f C
~
-. - r
.. ,,., ...
r1
y-vv.,. ..... vv



ot be r.:uc.




'.-: 'T
.:o:.
v,. ·._ _. .
systE.::1 '.::.
is ·che ov2:..-:2ll b:cc~:,dci·m :
?0:cce:;.t
_..,.;101..,.·.::
Local
Si:a·ce
f.~dcral
(OCv,JOC)
$ _..,_
,-:: -
-,8 . ~~o
10.0
,
- : L,
?""
-U
'-
!:l. 2
100 . C9o
$479
--
1
- '-'-·"
~cose
to
___
as
scale
"l, ~ ....
\,.,,._
-
.__
..
......,
)
_eecis
.eet U. S .
s_:,::,uvJ,00G :'..ev(;l cur::....:ntly p_ojectcd ::o-:: U·.e 1969 a:r:d ::.970 ..::..s.:::c.._ /~--s.
-·-·..c.~.· s
i~ 1973 and tr-ercaftcr cc~l ·~~-as
.J,.-h--- .'ith an overall o tlay :.:o_ thL: th'O C(;T;:::-al gove::-nr.·,·:rts on::.y S.L:
- t'.1-~, 1.l·.e; 30-!:lile :.·(;o_uircrne.,t .
would nc·
b .... ::c.c ..
,. ,
\.,..
_,_,
,:.r2 the tota::.::;,
1


.:v~. · a ~~csunt~ci e_r ier:


- 1
-::>-,H ;:. t,1
~.~
E il
O R : i. ... E
J
1


.


l ;;


). S S .._ ;



" , •
~
�i
.. 1_;-





.._J
J
•
· --
<..., _, •..... \..-.·...
......
('-"
- - - ,~,
~vJU,vv J
--;..- ::;,-;- ,~77,
VVv.,
UV)



,
-'.-6 . 3




$13--.. . :
52 . 7
5.~. 7
Dc'.(.'.lfo Cot:. ':y
13 . 6
7 . <.
c : ,,:.yto.7. Co;_~:·.·.:y
G·.:i .:ie'.: ·: Co-...:.:-. ·.:y
s i ·· --l...,..1 .,..............,_
___
.....," ' 1 .,
30 - :::il\3 sy s-:: c ..~.
cs o:2
i ss-:..:0


,~·· :'T.' bo:-.d


I·
~.::b l e 8 .
aS
cc:.:?_.~:--(=so:--;: c;:· i,OC.t...=-. CJS','.S , 30 - :,.::.:L:: A..,D
5?. - :,LLE SYS'i".:::-:S 1.· s;~;:..i:::. · (OJO;
$ 25 , 000


s,J


25, 00
35,000



7.5




50 , COO
35,COO
• - 7-::.
I
_,


_·, 76


-_:,n
000
..;. , 330
6, 95
40,000
%,000
9 , 00G
o,oco


.:-:;, 138


=-~,7SS



..2 , ..:. o~




1:_,s:o
1..:;.'::.::. J
21,0G0



.2,575




2,209
12,099
12,C99
~,
l/
0) t... .!..)
S,-:.S3
2.3, lS.:i
2.932
s::.J9,ooo
6,995


3,185


-- - v v
seq
--~, 330
30,000
__ J...., ...
\..-1..,
L.-,380


.,.s
o


50,J JC
. . Si:
-_J79
_.:,:,J
- ,..,
$ 2. , 8?.5



_ ,825




""\ ') ,-
8,030
7,725
li,373
L_.Q ,
._..)7~
_;
> .).c.~
-;
~



7:




-
$ :, S25


.s, :_55


' 23:!.,00G
S::.:-O::?S to $14,302., 000 i:~ -_9_:;~. ~d 1c·10::.s
olf ~t $l4,045,COO in :.9S5
HA :,\ ~~
t
c.: e
�·.: . 1..:::
- ..
.. •
........... ....
"- - - ' - ' · · · ' - - ' • -
- ..
.. •• r-
..:.: ./ _, . ~ ....... .
l.,.j
$ ::. JJ , JOJ, GJJ :::o:: e
o
c ost
.
.


.r:. s-: 0 ~.. a


of
c.~ .r: ,-...,--.
..i..Uj..
.,_ .... ,
1,.... !.
~ - . - _ ..... """I
r-""lf'"\
- :..::..:::.....1:::......,
3~-\~.le


~1:.0:;.


.
I
1 ('" -:: ,.
-J'-'


..~ ~·o


_..,' -
'"--..,/
lS72



~ i.. 3




--
-_J
,


J ..,,..


75



_ . 0




- ....
1
-• V
2.5
l . ...,.
?
-.
.
-








• .J




• C






...., C'
_..,.. J
_..,02
2.3
-
.... :1-
2.2
(;
·: sec
_..)().)
1/
2/
.
-'-
-'-
?
2.0
2.C
=-. 5
,.
-? . ::,- . ::,
1.6
1 .6
l .5
3.0




. 0






l. 1
,
1 ...
l/
r-
-1__. o0,..
l. 3
l. 2
C:\r----~
.. s - -c: ...
~
1.0
2.0
2 .5
-
' . ::,
2 .0
2.0
=--~ -:>~


_ ;7s


~'? - '
..,_
,1;_ 1'"'
____
v
F·,.!::. ·c. r:
_;_ . ::,
_../VV



.:,~7




s- -e·-'- ...-'" /
u.:::,:_::.o
l .0



. . 0

. . l




-'- . ::i
l .5
3.0
3 .0
3 .0
3.0
2.5
- J ' i.:,
s
...
.I,.
..
'
-.·
. . . -.
1.6
, o,..
__
? Q
__ c,.
?
2 4
2.3
1.5
l. 5


.3


- . ::,
- . ..,
- . ..,


. .s


"? ()
-- 0
-• V
1.5
- . ::,
l.S
l . -.l .3
1. 2
1.1
l .S


. .s


.l. .::,
-7 . _,::
l .S
,
-'-
-1 . ::,-
-
. ::,
l. s
1.5


':.--u;:. T20 2.c 6 . i-.ss~-~2:s $100,000, 0 OJ ::.n


?ecio:t:::.l :::.:-1c. .~53,0Gu,' Ou i::: s·-a-::e ::::..:-.cis .
A- U.'TlCS $200,000, coo ::.:1 Fede:::al c,.1:d
$48,000 , 000 i~ t:::.~c ~Ll~ds .
-35 1"\A,.,,.,-t\.GR( .. ~C .
.J,
..


.n


riSS:~,;.., ....
_ __
�r
,. c--_~
__ -;:::.l ·..:h
c.cci i c'c.
S _'~tCr:l,
T ,-
., .
cos·-: of
ce1.1 lT:J
sys-.::e::i ·;:o
.. r ---,
~-·
~
Sc.;
ir.-,pact would
/jj
!ewer r~:e up to l S3
total cos~ woe!~ ~~lica:a.
o . th
_ .
simply
.1
eo....:s a
cutl
ve
c _·cce<l
-37-
1 . 5 m _ls s:-.cw-r.
,.."I ,
-
~.. ..
...... ...1 -
...
'""
�.
~
- .
'-"'--'·-· _,:_...., :..."" ·.: :_....., _:
..
..,, _....,_
cor.2- t :--·..1.: ...: :.. ,:. __
-c:...::s


s t!:2.t


8.
· - .,.. -
h'
-,-
"•""f'.
.
,..
.. ·- - - -
v1..-...,,..:... .• -...J • •
~--..I....,..:.. ... _ ••
c ci s :.. u.


,_· .... ·' _c...0


-~:. vie ~ in
sr.,;·1,..:.-.:
~ou!~ cos: $~76 , 00, OJ <..::d vou::.c.
30 - mi l
.:-,
, -; 1
.,._\,.o. ..__ -
--'}- -::i.


i ..:


L .. .....



.oc::2.




s ys t 0..
(U0O,JOu)
72 . : .~o
.:.o c "l
Stc::.:e



.o .o




-,_ 7 . 9
~276
l "O . O~u
- ------- "-'
J- ~~ ~
i -
six years i . stcad o L cig~z.
--cc c.<.cc;-_.:_ over t:~e eigf t - year per:.c_
...<1kir.g a major i .1pac-c
SJS--.
~~:ie luc2.: ..:'i.::2.:~
•v
••
V\... .. __.
-s.::-.e
po.l -~- .c :...r a I s ci::cu:::·.:io:1 pr
-....,:.>-
l
!)_-: •. .: .
...
~
• .._,
�~~
.-
'
\
·~4.L !d ;;LL
I
!
I..
,..
'
i
I
'
FINANCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF
.
ATLANTA'S RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM
,..
',_
Prepared for
Atlanta . Region Metropolitan Planning Commission
for inclusion in report of
Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel
..
HAMMER;





·August 21, 1967
GREENE, SILER ASSOCIATES
WASHINGTON-ATLANTA
230 Peachtree Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
�