logo
Where is the money going to help ‘Atlanta Move Forward?' Here's what we found

Where is the money going to help ‘Atlanta Move Forward?' Here's what we found

Yahoo29-01-2025

Atlanta council members grilled the Atlanta DOT after an audit showed some concerning findings about a major infrastructure package.
In May 2022, Atlanta voters approved a set of ballot measures to make big investments in the city's infrastructure. But only a fraction of that has been spent, according to a report by the city auditor.
'The sentiments that went through me were anger, embarrassment, but then, more importantly, a feeling of defeat,' Councilman Alex Wan said.
Councilmembers expressed frustration and concern at a meeting Wednesday that the Moving Atlanta Forward Plan may seem to be falling behind.
'This is a city of Atlanta problem that has stretched on for decades,' Councilman Amir Farokhi said.
Councilmembers brought up 'Renew Atlanta,' which was an infrastructure package from 2015 that ran behind schedule.
Voters approved the Move Atlanta Forward proposal back in 2022.
Atlanta officials said at the time that the measures approved by voters included two bonds and a special sales tax renewal, greenlighting a $750 million funding effort for transportation, recreation, public safety, and the arts.
TRENDING STORIES:
Truck spills piles of 'undeliverable' mail on side of I-285 in Cobb County
DoorDash driver vanishes after making delivery in Clayton County
Man who refills vending machines at GA high school accused of using AI to create nude images of kids
Funds were split between a $400 million infrastructure bond and a $350 million TSPLOST extension, effectively a $0.04 tax on every $10 purchase for retail transactions in Atlanta, according to city officials.
Now, the Atlanta City Auditor's Office reports less than 10% has been spent.
The auditor's report found that 'as of August 2024, $47 million had been spent on Moving Atlanta Forward projects, less than 10% of project funds.'
The Atlanta Department of Transportation says they have spent more money since then. However, the dashboard shows the program has since paid $69 million on projects, or 9.3% of the approved funds.
In their examination of the funding package, the auditor's office found that projects were slow to progress and that districts with the least amount of spending had higher poverty levels than the others.
'That was eye-opening but not shocking,' Councilman Antonio Lewis said.
The Atlanta Department of Transportation says some projects have not made it to construction because they are more complex than others and need additional community input.
The mayor's office indicated weather may have caused some delays, and emergency repairs forced some projects to be prioritized over others.
The report also found that there was not a central oversight mechanism, and having one 'may improve consistency across the three project delivery departments.'
Those departments are Transportation, Enterprise Asset Management, and Parks and Recreation.
Due to the audit's findings, the office made several recommendations to help the programs get back on track, for oversight, spending tracking, and overall project management.
According to the audit's highlights, the recommendations were either agreed to or partially agreed to, with completion dates set for June 2025 at the latest.
However, Council members expressed apprehension about if the projects would be completed.
'I've heard from a number of constituents that they are giving up, we are just giving up that we are actually going to get these projects,' Wan said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

DoorDash accused of purposely misleading its customers
DoorDash accused of purposely misleading its customers

Miami Herald

time19 hours ago

  • Miami Herald

DoorDash accused of purposely misleading its customers

DoorDash (DASH) was founded in 2013 by a small group of Stanford students with the idea of helping small businesses with food delivery. Tony Xu, Andy Fang, Stanley Tang, and Evan Moore were so humble when they launched the business, which was originally called Palo Alto Delivery, that they made food deliveries themselves. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter After getting $120,000 in funding from Y Combinator in trade for a 7% stake in the business, the company renamed itself DoorDash in 2013 and started on a road that would eventually lead to enormous success. While DoorDash wasn't the only food delivery business of its type when it launched - Uber Eats was also in the space - it eventually eclipsed it, becoming the largest food delivery provider by 2019. Related: DoorDash tries controversial method to deliver your meal Today, DoorDash holds the largest market share of 67%, compared to Uber Eats' 23%, per Statistica. The company has also expanded outside the food delivery space, offering everything from flowers to beauty products to pet food. Basically, if you can walk into a store and buy it, DoorDash is willing to bring it to you. But now DoorDash is facing new claims that it purposely misleads its customers, which could have a serious effect on its reputation as a company if proven true. The Competition Bureau announced that it filed a lawsuit against DoorDash and its Canadian subsidiary on Monday for a practice it calls "drip pricing." Drip pricing is a pricing technique in which firms advertise only part of a product's price and reveal other charges later as the customer goes through the buying process, per the Federal Trade Commission's description. More Restaurants: Beloved Mexican restaurant closing iconic location after 63 yearsMajor restaurant chain quietly closes several locationsIconic restaurant closing its doors after 32 years The lawsuit alleges that DoorDash misleads its customers by advertising lower prices that are very different by the time the customer makes it to checkout and fees are tacked on. "The company has been engaging in the alleged conduct for close to a decade, acquiring nearly $1 billion in mandatory fees from consumers," the Competition Bureau said in a statement. The lawsuit also alleges that DoorDash makes certain fees appear as if they are taxes, when they are not. Related: Domino's Pizza suffers a startling loss as customers switch gears It also also asks DoorDash to "stop the deceptive price and discount advertising; stop portraying fees as taxes; pay a penalty; and issue restitution to affected consumers who purchased food and other items through DoorDash's platform." DoorDash gave a statement to TheStreet, saying,"Transparency with customers is a top priority at DoorDash. All fees on DoorDash, which support the high-quality operations of our platform, are clearly labeled and disclosed to consumers through the ordering process - including a final review before payment. To be crystal clear, DoorDash does not hide fees from consumers or mislead them in any way." "This application is a misguided and excessive attempt to target one of Canada's leading local commerce platforms. It unfairly singles out DoorDash, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these claims." Live Nation/Ticketmaster is another business that's been accused of deceptive pricing, leading to public outcry. It's faced multiple allegations of tacking on fees that could drive up the cost of a ticket significantly. Its Dynamic Pricing model also allowed people to resell tickets for dramatically higher prices, which many felt was a way of aiding scalpers. The issue was further spotlighted after complaints around ticketing breakdown for Taylor Swift's Eras tour, and many fans sued the company because of the way the event was handled. The Justice Department sued Ticketmaster in May of 2024, swearing to break up what it called a "monopoly" across the live concert industry. This case is currently ongoing. In the meantime, on May 8, 2025, Ticketmaster announced a new model called All In Pricing that would include all fees (not not taxes). Related: Jim Cramer says these hot new stocks are ones to watch The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

Competition Bureau sues DoorDash, accuses firm of misleading customers with fees
Competition Bureau sues DoorDash, accuses firm of misleading customers with fees

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Competition Bureau sues DoorDash, accuses firm of misleading customers with fees

TORONTO — Canada's competition watchdog is suing DoorDash Inc. and its Canadian subsidiary for marketing its online delivery services at a lower price than what consumers actually wind up paying. The Competition Bureau says an investigation found DoorDash customers were unable to purchase food and other items at prices advertised on DoorDash's websites and mobile apps because of mandatory fees added at checkout. The extra charges range from service and delivery fees to amounts sought for couriering things a further distance or placing smaller orders. The bureau says the charges were sometimes framed as if they were taxes and resulted in consumers paying higher prices than advertised, amounting to a deceptive practice known as drip pricing. The bureau alleges DoorDash used drip pricing for close to a decade, making nearly $1 billion from mandatory fees paid by customers. It wants the company to stop the practice, cease portraying fees as taxes, pay a penalty and issue restitution to affected consumers, but DoorDash says the requests are "misguided" because it does not hide fees from consumers or mislead them in any way. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 9, 2025. Tara Deschamps, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Canada's Competition Bureau suing DoorDash over prices, discounts
Canada's Competition Bureau suing DoorDash over prices, discounts

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Canada's Competition Bureau suing DoorDash over prices, discounts

OTTAWA (Reuters) -Canada's Competition Bureau said on Monday it was suing DoorDash and its Canadian subsidiary for allegedly advertising misleading prices and discounts. The bureau said in a statement that it found that consumers were unable to purchase food and other items at the advertised price on DoorDash's websites and mobile applications due to the addition of mandatory fees at checkout. The bureau said it was suing to stop DoorDash from what it called deceptive price and discount advertising. It is seeking a penalty from the companies and wants them to offer restitution to affected consumers. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store