Distance-controlled analysis of 104,597 Fulton County tax parcels, 2015 to 2025
Using Fulton County's own parcel-level assessment data, TAD parcels did not produce excess property value growth. Non-TAD parcels at the same distance from downtown grew more, in both percentage and absolute dollar terms.
The City Auditor's comparison of TAD vs non-TAD property values does not control for location. Once you do, the TAD "advantage" disappears. In most cases, it reverses.
Compares TAD parcels (0-3 mi from downtown) to ALL non-TAD parcels (including suburban areas 5-10+ mi away).
Downtown grew faster than suburbs. That is not a TAD effect. That is urbanization.
Compares TAD parcels to non-TAD parcels at the same distance from downtown.
Control for location, and the TAD "advantage" vanishes.
Why this matters: TAD parcels sit a median of 2.0 miles from downtown. Non-TAD parcels sit at 4.1 miles. Any comparison that ignores this difference is comparing apples to oranges.
TAD vs non-TAD parcels within the same distance band from downtown. If TADs were causing growth, TAD bars would be taller. They are not.
Same comparison in raw dollar terms. Non-TAD parcels gained more at 0-3 miles from downtown.
Each TAD compared to non-TAD parcels at the same distance. Perry/Bolton at 5.1 miles from downtown shows the largest TAD growth, but even it underperforms when matched on property class and value.
Each dot is a parcel. Brighter = higher growth. TAD boundaries in white, city boundary in gray. High-growth areas appear regardless of TAD boundaries, concentrated near downtown in all directions. Eastern Atlanta (DeKalb County) excluded due to data availability.
Map shows all TAD parcels + 15% random sample of non-TAD parcels (53,880 in city limits). Statistical analysis uses the full dataset of 91,787 parcels (after excluding stale assessments).
For each TAD parcel, we find the closest-matching non-TAD parcel: same property class, within 0.5 miles, within 50% of appraised value, within 75% of lot size. This is as close to an apples-to-apples comparison as the data allows.
TAD areas have more condos and commercial properties. Non-TAD areas are mostly single-family residential. When you separate by class and distance band, TADs still underperform within each category.
Residential (82k parcels): TADs lag by 12-404% depending on distance band.
Condos (6.6k parcels): Roughly comparable at 3-4 miles.
Vacant Land (3.5k parcels): Non-TAD vacant lots appreciate faster at every distance.
The strongest causal test we can do with this data: compare parcels just inside a TAD boundary to parcels just outside. If TADs cause growth, there should be a jump at the boundary. There is one, but it goes the wrong direction.
Parcels immediately outside TAD boundaries grew 79 percentage points more than parcels immediately inside. This is the opposite of what a TAD effect would look like. The difference is statistically significant (p < 0.0001).
The BeltLine TAD covers 37,000+ parcels, many of them miles from any trail investment. Critics say this dilutes the signal. So we split by distance from the trail itself:
Even parcels within a quarter mile of the trail (139% growth) underperform distance-matched non-TAD controls (155%). The BeltLine trail raised property values, but not more than the market was already delivering at the same distance from downtown.
A finding is only meaningful if it holds up under different analytical choices. We tested four matching tolerance levels. TADs underperform at every single one.
Overall difference: -24.5% [95% CI: -27.5, -22.4]. Zero excluded from every confidence interval.
+/-0.25mi, +/-25% value: -11.5% (1,483 pairs). Even strict controls show TAD underperformance.
+/-1.0mi, +/-100% value: -16.8% (1,892 pairs). Wider tolerances make TADs look worse.
Only 1.8% of parcels changed class 2015 to 2025. Rezoning is not driving these results.
Every known bias in this analysis works against our finding. We are understating any TAD effect, not overstating it.
7,369 new parcels in 2025 not in 2015 are excluded. 76% of them are in TADs (new condo plats). Including them would help the TAD case.
TADs created between 1998 and 2013 may have already produced growth before our window starts. If so, we are missing it.
Tax assessments are not market prices. But the same assessor applies the same methodology to TAD and non-TAD parcels. The bias is uniform.
0-2mi: 22,773 TAD vs 285 non-TAD. But at 2-4mi where both sides have thousands of parcels, the same pattern holds.
True. But we can show that comparable parcels grew faster without TADs. The burden of proof should be on the entity diverting $905M from schools, not on critics to prove a negative.
Fair point for early TADs. But the Auditor's report claims ongoing value using current increment as evidence of success. If the justification was in 1998, why is revenue still being diverted in 2025?
If TADs make nearby non-TAD areas appreciate (spillover), our controls look artificially good. That would reduce the gap. Yet TADs still underperform.
One out of eight is a 12.5% success rate. Perry/Bolton is 5.1 miles from downtown, the only TAD far enough that market forces alone would not drive growth. That supports our point.
Then growth rate is the wrong success metric. But it is the metric the Auditor uses. And non-TAD areas with similar blight concerns (South Atlanta, Pittsburgh) grew more.
The Auditor's report uses property value increment as the primary success measure. We are evaluating their claim on their own terms.
Not the claim being evaluated. The question is whether $905M diverted from schools was justified by growth that would not have happened otherwise. There are cheaper tools for sprawl prevention.
Land value reflects location premium. Improvement value reflects buildings and development. If TADs were driving growth through construction, improvement values should outperform. Instead, land values are nearly identical on both sides, confirming that the market prices location the same way regardless of TAD status.
Atlanta Public Schools lost $905M in property tax revenue to TADs that did not produce growth above what the market delivered on its own in nearby non-TAD neighborhoods.
Non-TAD neighborhoods at 2-3 miles from downtown (Grant Park, East Atlanta, Reynoldstown, Kirkwood) grew 217%, far more than BeltLine TAD parcels at 110%. No public subsidy required.
The Auditor's claimed 6x "halo effect" is the distance-decay gradient from downtown. Everything near downtown appreciated, TAD or not.
Perry/Bolton at 5.1 miles from downtown is the only TAD where growth exceeded what the market would deliver. It is also the only one far enough to actually need a subsidy.