You haven't finished voting next Tuesday until you've turned the ballot over and answered some questions for the State of Georgia. Five proposed amendments and five referenda will give the unwary voter pause.

Here is a synopsis of what they mean, with comments both pro and con from the impartial and nonpartisan League of Women Voters of Georgia (LWV). The full text of the LWV explanations may be found at www.ga.lwv.org/VG_GA.htm#A1.

Proposed Amendment No. 1: Would create a fund for grants to local governments to help them manage both natural and historic properties in Georgia, as well as water resources and wildlife habitat.

PRO: The LWV says Georgia has needed a means of acquiring and setting aside environmentally sensitive lands such as watersheds and passive recreational lands to preserve them for future generations. Historically significant buildings and archeological sites would also be eligible for these funds.

CON: Funds would be raised through a $1 per $1,000 tax added to the existing $1 property transfer tax (hence the claim by opponents that this is a 100 percent increase). One argument against is that this fee will be paid by developers, but enjoyed by all users of the public properties.

A Yes vote favors the creation of this tax and fund.

Amendment No. 2: Would designate specific educational programs and set priorities for the use of state lottery proceeds, so that HOPE scholarships and Pre-Kindergarten would be funded first, while new buildings and equipment including computers and technology training for teachers would be the last funded.

PRO: All qualified applicants for HOPE grants and all approved Pre-K programs would receive monies before technology courses and capital projects do.

CON: The LWV cautions that making this control a constitutional amendment would take from the General Assembly the option to fund or not to fund specific educational programs from lottery proceeds. The interactive learning tools and research tools such as Galileo, for which Georgia schools have been acclaimed nationally, would not be supported under this provision because they involve hardware. This amendment "would make it extremely difficult to fund new and unforeseen educational improvement programs, as each measure would require another constitutional amendment."

A Yes vote favors limiting lottery funds as described.

Amendment No. 3: Would create a trust fund to help care for and rehabilitate Georgians who suffer brain or spinal cord injuries, by adding 10 percent on fines paid by persons convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

PRO: Motor vehicle accidents cause more than half the brain injuries and about 37 percent of spinal cord injuries in the United States including those suffered by about 26,000 Georgians annually. Expenses of extended care and rehabilitation are substantial and not always fully covered by insurance.

CON: The LWV comments that there are too many unanswered questions: Will injuries compensated be exclusively those suffered because of drunk driving or would a person injured in a fall off a ladder qualify? Will this fund supplement or supersede traditional medical insurance? What about medical costs incurred by families of those who do not survive their injuries?

A Yes vote favors adding the penalty and creating the fund.

Amendment No. 4: Would use money from special wildflower license tags and permit fees to fund highway beautification.

PRO: Wildflower planting programs, landscaping, and the preservation of trees and shrubs can make Georgia's littered and weed-choked roadsides as attractive as those of other states. Sufficient funding has never been available, and is low-priority in the allocation of general revenues; a dedicated source of revenue would make it work.

CON: Vague wording of the amendment regarding the distribution of funds, which agencies shall receive them, which highways they will benefit (state only or county roads too?), whether improved signage would be included. The LWV thinks the project deserves broader support, such as from motor fuel excise taxes.

A Yes vote supports creating the fund from special fees.

Amendment No. 5: Would transfer the responsibility of setting certain public officials' salaries from the General Assembly to a new independent 18-member "Georgia Citizens Commission on Compensation of Public Officials." PRO: Salaries for public positions should be evaluated objectively and set on an equitable scale based on job responsibility and in response to changing economic conditions.

CON: Mechanics of the proposal would allow changes to be made almost automatically unless specifically rejected "akin to spending on automatic pilot," says the LWV.

A Yes vote favors creating the independent commission.

Proposed Referendum A: Would exempt family-owned farms, nurseries, Christmas tree farms from ad valorem (property) taxes. Owners of commercial pecan and peach orchards, blueberry producers, and hog and poultry farmers initiated this proposal.

LWV's evaluation asks if there is a specific hardship being relieved by this referendum, enough to warrant tax relief? Georgia voters rejected granting an ad valorem exemption for blueberry growers in 1994 this would reverse that vote and add exemptions for animal and plant production, including tobacco.

Fayette Tax Commissioner George Wingo said there are so few commercial farmers in Fayette County that this referendum would have "negligible impact" on tax revenues here.

A Yes vote would favor the ad valorem tax exemption.

Referendum B: Would allow homeowners to continue to claim homestead exemption even if for health reasons they are no longer living in the residence. An elderly person, for example, now living in a nursing or retirement facility would not lose his $2,000 homestead exemption on his property.

LWV comments that "health reasons" was not defined, nor was a time frame established. Absentee ownership of property normally results in forfeiture of the homestead exemption, the goal of which is to reward those who reside in and take care of the home on which they pay taxes.

Wingo estimated that passage of this question might cost Fayette County $100 in lost revenues, if that.

A Yes vote favors letting the homestead exemption stand.

Referendum C: Would exempt from ad valorem taxes all property owned and operated exclusively as a church, association of churches, church-related mission agency, or church auxiliary organization, assuming they qualify for 501(c)(3) status with the Department of Internal Revenue.

This change was initiated on behalf of the Georgia Baptist Convention seeking tax relief for its headquarters in north Fulton County. The provision would remove from local tax digests various structures, parking lots, and personal property such as kitchen equipment owned by church auxiliary groups.

At present structures used for worship are exempt from ad valorem taxes, but not all auxiliary property is. Apartment complexes owned by churches or church associations, for example, as well as rental property, vacant land, and income-producing recreational facilities currently are subject to ad valorem taxes.

Wingo said that with churches already exempt, "the only thing that comes under [this proposal] might be the vehicle the pastor drives. I can't think of hardly anything that might be out there" that would affect tax revenues in Fayette County, he said.

A Yes vote would extend tax exemptions to include auxiliary church properties.

Referenda D and E: Would allow ad valorem taxes to be waived on motor vehicles not only owned by but also leased by disabled veterans, or owned by former prisoners of war who are residents of Georgia.

"That wouldn't be much," said Wingo. He estimates there may be only two or three former POWs in the county and "probably a dozen disabled veterans."

A Yes vote favors the exemptions.

Of all the questions, he said, only the one regarding church property might affect county ad valorem revenues, "but that won't amount to a hill of beans. Out of $7 million tax roll this year, it will be inconsequential."