Water

Scientific research suggests that in order to protect water quality, all streams should be protected by riparian buffers of at least 50 feet in width. Do you support increasing minimum buffer widths (under the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act) from 25 feet to 50 feet?

 

Vaughn (D)

In highly developed in-town areas a 25-foot buffer may be sufficient, but only because buffers in these areas are less effective at filtering runoff. I'm always wary of the state government getting involved in local government matters. However, I'm a big believer in respecting the research when it comes to environmental issues - especially with respect to our water supply. We must have clean water.

Statewide environmental standards that act as a "floor" rather than a ceiling are appropriate. Because the 50-foot buffer width is supported by research, and would be a floor not a ceiling, I support it.

Greenspace Protection

Do you favor establishing a designated funding source for the preservation of greenspace? If so, what kind of funding source do you propose?

 

Vaughn (D)

Greenspace preservation is more than just an environmental issue - it is an economic issue as well. Permanent protection of greenspace greatly enhances a community's quality of life - as well as its economic competitiveness. I believe that greenspace preservation is as necessary to the infrastructure of a community's development as roads, water supply, and sewage.

Designated funding sources have become a hot-button issue recently. Nobody wants to have to keep going back to the General Assembly each year to obtain their funds, and greenspace preservation is too important an issue to leave in the hands of the ever-shifting preferences of the General Assembly. However, it seems to me there are other options besides a designated fund. Voluntary state income tax check-off boxes can act as a nice way to supplement greenspace preservation, but I'm not sure they'll generate sufficient revenue to properly fund greenspace preservation. In essence, I think we need legislators who understand and appreciate the importance of greenspace and who will act accordingly.

In 2000, the General Assembly created the Georgia Greenspace Program, which also includes the Greenspace Trust Fund. Because the Greenspace Fund is not a designated fund, the General Assembly is annually given the power to fund (or not fund) the Georgia Greenspace Fund. We need legislators who will fight to ensure the Greenspace Program continues to grow. Sadly, the legislature recently chose to divert the interest generated by the Greenspace Trust Fund for use on general expenses. At the very least, this sort of diversion should have been strictly limited in duration. HB 314 attempted to put a time limit on this diversion, and I would have supported that diversion.

I believe that establishing a TDR program is also something we should continue to explore in our efforts to preserve greenspace.

Pollution control

Fees collected through the Scrap Tire Management Program, the Hazardous Waste Trust Fund and the recently revised Erosion and Sedimentation Act have been diverted to the state's general fund, rather than earmarked for their intended purposes. Consequently, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division lacks the funds to adequately administer some of its environmental protection programs. Do you favor a constitutional amendment requiring that funds raised through such pollution control fees be earmarked for pollution control purposes?

 

Vaughn (D)

Transportation

Transportation decisions made by GDOT and MACORTS that affect Athens-Clarke County are often at odds with local values and with our Comprehensive Land Use Plan, effectively undermining local land use decisions. What will you do to help ACC have a stronger voice in the transportation decisions that affect us?

 

Vaughn (D)

Transit

ACC residents have expressed a desire for more funding for transit. The Georgia Transit Association has proposed changes to Georgia law that would improve funding for transit, including a .25% sales tax for metropolitan transit authorities outside of Atlanta; a state transportation infrastructure fee on fuel purchases; and making state funds available for transit systems. Do you support these initiatives?

Vaughn (D)

I welcome, and will consider, all efforts to increase the mass transit budget. Right now we're restricted from voting on sales taxes to fund alternative transportation. Local governments need to have that power because people have got to be able to make those decisions for themselves. Once again, I'm not opposed to state agencies setting a statewide standard as long as it acts as a "floor," but I'm troubled when they attempt to set the ceiling.

I would look closely at making state funds available for these state transit systems. Ultimately, the goal is increasing public transportation ridership - in Athens and the rest of Georgia. I think one way to accomplish that goal may be through institutional partnerships. That option has not yet been explored to my satisfaction.

Nobody likes the idea of additional taxes, but what's interesting about the transportation infrastructure fee (TIF) on the retail purchase of motor fuel, proposed by many groups including Georgia Transit Association, is that it gives Georgia taxpayers income tax credit in an equal amount collected - passing most of the cost to travelers passing through the state.

Again, I'm open to hearing about anything that improves the quality of life for the people in this district. I care about this community and I know we can continue to do better on these and other issues.