This year Georgians also get to vote for 3 constitutional amendments. These 3 amendments are important, yet have received almost no mention from the mainstream media. Perhaps if the amendments had been entitled Obama 1. Obama 2, and Obama 3 the media might have noticed. The AJC finally provided some coverage- here is their breakdown written by James Salzer and Stacy Shelton :

AMENDMENT 1: Would provide tax breaks to individuals and corporations that own more than 2,000 acres of land. Under the amendment, forests would be taxed based on actual use rather than the potential development value, bringing Georgia in line with other Southeastern states. The lost revenue to cities and counties would be covered by the state taxpayers, at an estimated cost of about $40 million a year. In exchange, timber owners would have to agree not to subdivide or develop their land for at least 15 years, or face stiff financial penalties.

AMENDMENT 2: Would allow school property tax revenue to help fund redevelopment projects. Lawmakers passed a law in 1985 allowing the practice, helping a number of projects, including Atlantic Station, spring to life. The Georgia Supreme Court ruled in February that the state constitution prohibits school tax money from being spent on anything other than education. That decision cut the tax subsidies available to the redevelopment efforts across the state, from Atlanta's Beltline loop of trails, transit and parks to Smyrna's effort to overhaul aging shopping centers. Critics say school tax money is too valuable a resource to be used to subsidize development costs.

AMENDMENT 3 - Would let counties and cities approve "infrastructure development districts," meant largely for developers. Essentially, developers would enter into a development plan with cities or counties. Developers could borrow money to pay for infrastructure/amenities (streets, sewers, golf courses, etc.) in their development, then levy fees on the people who buy the homes in the development to pay off the bonds. Supporters say the so-called "private cities" amendment will help spur development in rural counties. Critics say taxpayers outside the development could be stuck with the expense of building access roads and upgrading existing water and sewer systems to accommodate the new construction. They also say only government should have the right to assess fees.