[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6531689,"mediaKeyId","3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507","parentId",3507196,"title","Board acknowledges certified tax rate and advances budget with first readings; finance director says Williamson County reassessment will raise levy","audioSeconds",2034,"startMs",4159000,"endMs",6193000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507&start=4159&end=6193","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507/thumbnail_4159000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6531689/Tennessee/Board-acknowledges-certified-tax-rate-and-advances-budget-with-first-readings-finance-director-says-Williamson-County-reassessment-will-raise-levy","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6531689-a3e52702defac17d58f0f2639f332615/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177738&Signature=InZME5QcccBHhDVW2Z3U7rwMWvU4PofRiWiZ6jxw8o~RTE1i-SZwombgg9O4Dz9a2voyuHCE0jMuy~UVtOZEtbUaTGvlJ8mOMbDPJAWGMfGmPOmqRL5nw8msG~~~PpE0a~Lb4sAkZGlTPLPTX08cAi6oGPykld4Osa6CMk4Qau2VJvqO6iESv1YmrNpE4f0hi0Cb5xFwiY8j4Nxm4zfuMi1Ffbr-VPWxfhxFjooWf3ZzNq2Jl-eOxlf1UZBIkp1xD~Cxv~BN5FLo9zrVyXqXvFXds4y2MyIKv~~ZAAigMQiuL7EMa6eTyHa9ga1UQY4P6MlQU~nBoUymdYu9ttRM~Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Spring Hill, TN","date","2025-05-19T00:00:00Z","article","The Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Aldermen acknowledged the state-certified tax rate and advanced the city’s fiscal 2025–26 budget and tax-rate ordinances during the meeting.

The board first approved Resolution 25-129 acknowledging receipt of the certified tax rate from the state comptroller’s office by a 9–0 vote. Finance Director Missy Holden explained the certificate is a procedural part of the four-year reappraisal process and said the certified rate acknowledgment does not itself set the city’s levy. Holden told the board that the reappraisal increases assessed values on the Williamson County side and that, if the city maintains the current rate, the result will be higher city property tax bills for many property owners.

At first reading, the board approved Ordinance 25-12, which would set the city tax rate on the Williamson County side at 0.739 per $100 of assessed value and maintain 0.739 on the Maury (Murray) County side. Holden said that change would increase the city’s tax levy on the Williamson County side by about $3.7 million and represent about a 38% tax increase when compared to the prior levy. The ordinance received an 8–1 vote on first reading.

The board then approved first reading of the annual budget ordinance, Ordinance 25-13, by a 9–0 vote. Holden told the board the higher assessment produced more revenue than her earlier estimate: the levy produced roughly $3.7 million more than budgeted and left an estimated general-fund surplus of about $300,000. She recommended preserving that surplus and noted the board may later approve budget amendments.

Why it matters: Although the certified-rate acknowledgement itself is a procedural step, Holden and several aldermen warned that social-media posts saying the tax rate is “staying flat” may mislead homeowners. Because assessed values rose after reappraisal, keeping the nominal tax rate the same increases property tax bills on the Williamson County side. Alderman Kanapari (Kanapari) raised the social-media concern and asked staff to ensure clarity for residents.

What the board discussed and decided: Alderman Kanapari asked whether social posts saying the rate is flat would mislead homeowners; Holden said the certified-rate resolution must be acknowledged regardless and that the later ordinance will determine the levy. When Kanapari asked whether the levy would produce $3.7 million in new revenue, Holden confirmed that number and the approximately 38% increase on the Williamson County side. She also noted the comptroller had suggested a lower rate (0.5353) as an option, but the board moved forward with the rate of 0.739 on first reading.

Next steps: The tax-rate and budget ordinances were approved on first reading. The tax-rate ordinance requires final reading before it becomes law; the budget will proceed through the second reading and final adoption process. Staff said they will circulate ordinance language and additional documentation for public review before final votes.

Votes and formal actions (at this meeting): Resolution 25-129 acknowledging the certified tax rate, approved 9–0. Ordinance 25-12 (first reading adopting the tax rate) approved 8–1 on first reading. Ordinance 25-13 (first reading adopting the annual budget and tax rate for FY 2025–26) approved 9–0 on first reading.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOMA Meeting Monday, May 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Board acknowledged the state-certified tax rate and approved first readings of the city’s tax-rate and annual-budget ordinances; Finance Director Missy Holden said keeping the current nominal rate will raise property tax bills on the Williamson County side because reassessed values increased.","taxTitle","Board of Mayor and Aldermen Meetings, Spring Hill, Maury County, Tennessee","taxId",69740,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6531694,"Board approves joint development agreement with GV Spring Hills; amends Commerce Center plan amid timeline concerns",1826,2684000,4510000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507&start=2684&end=4510","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507/thumbnail_2684000.jpg","/articles/6531694/Tennessee/Board-approves-joint-development-agreement-with-GV-Spring-Hills-amends-Commerce-Center-plan-amid-timeline-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6531694-c2484a1bb69c1695161c6e633b779419/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177738&Signature=AjsCUzXbK0a9kRtyyp407NSzlOJ6itIyI7W2CzglJQrWvmQdwcQG0H31YXf8lrEwLgUdJwjsmXNGmyrmiiPFlcyvwtxtJOjHeGljEE7dXJedPQnpHTfJNGGnACCt3NzWX0h50t8e9V-bmi1I0odJ3ONbdiYcyzLk8sSBL4EoTgzy6MOpmoamyxMNMytJ0YHhOOmSX2IPbljeSZkTUkG-J5awOYcMAwBHCAS0AWKPba67c~oWo2p4iJqpu7da-zAq5pPjFBEOsdHAbQgctEGfkIx7KuCnf4EnydYhU3fYaMWXhrTqgYMSxSp5qQBWnupg7YqWDX21rLtBxqJVttIcDw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to approve a revised joint development agreement with GV Spring Hills LLC and adopted changes to the Spring Hill Commerce Center master development plan after the developer and city staff negotiated adjustments to construction and right-of-way timelines and cleared perceived conflicts between the development agreement and plan conditions.

City staff presented the revised agreement and supporting materials and described an amendment to Exhibit B1 that sets the schedule for required improvements: 18 months for design, 24 months for right-of-way and easement acquisition, followed by 24 months for construction, with the clock starting on the agreement’s effective date. Assistant City Administrator Dan Allen told the board the amendment “clarifies that there’s 18 months for design, 24 months for right of way acquisition and easements, and then another 24 months for construction.”

The Board approved the main resolution authorizing the amended joint development agreement by voice vote 9–0. The exhibit amendment was approved 9–0. During the ordinance vote on changes to the Commerce Center master plan the board approved an amendment specifying that any conditions of approval that conflict with the amended development agreement will not supersede that agreement; the final ordinance passed 7–2.

Why it matters: The changes affect a large planned industrial development in Spring Hill and fix scheduling provisions that staff said were necessary to ensure right-of-way acquisitions and road construction occur in an administrable sequence. City staff and the developer told the board they wanted the exhibit’s timeline to be the operative schedule if there was any inconsistency with dates elsewhere in the development agreement.

What the board discussed: Board members and staff exchanged several rounds of clarifying questions about how the timeline in Exhibit B1 would interact with dates stated elsewhere in the development agreement. City attorney and staff raised concerns that the amendment as drafted could produce a five-and-a-half-year schedule from the approval date, which might conflict with a specific February date noted in the body of the development agreement. After discussion the board added a follow-up amendment directing staff to align any conflicting dates in the body of the agreement to match Exhibit B1; staff advised that alignment would be an administrative change to avoid inconsistent default dates.

Developer counsel Andrew Burick told the board the developer’s understanding matches the amendment. “That is the developer’s understanding and interpretation of this agreement,” Burick said, adding that the amended exhibit “is to be considered the overriding agreement of the parties, notwithstanding any other dates contained in this agreement.”

Concerns and next steps: Staff noted the Exhibit B1 timeline affects budget planning. Finance Director Missy Holden told the board the city did not have the road work in next year’s budget and that staff would “amend the budget to include it.” Several aldermen said they wanted to be sure the board and staff had reviewed the traffic study and other technical exhibits before approving later project phases.

Votes and formal actions: The resolution authorizing the revised joint development agreement passed 9–0. The Exhibit B1 amendment passed 9–0. The ordinance amending the Commerce Center master development plan passed 7–2. The board later reconsidered elements of the development agreement on procedural grounds and directed staff and the developer to make the date alignments discussed on the record.

The board combined the development-agreement vote with a separate one-year extension of an existing planned development approval for approximately 499.68 acres; that extension was approved 9–0 earlier in the meeting.

Aldermen and staff said they will continue to circulate final drafts and corrected exhibits to ensure the text of the development agreement, its exhibits and the ordinance readings all match before final administrative sign-offs.","The Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to approve a revised joint development agreement with GV Spring Hills LLC and adopted changes to the Spring Hill Commerce Center master development plan after negotiating a new schedule for design, right-of-way acquisition and construction.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6531674,"Staff warns a sewer moratorium could cut millions from development funds; board urged to plan funding scenarios",252,5017000,5269000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507&start=5017&end=5269","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507/thumbnail_5017000.jpg","/articles/6531674/Tennessee/Staff-warns-a-sewer-moratorium-could-cut-millions-from-development-funds-board-urged-to-plan-funding-scenarios","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6531674-acb95973d807e6923f03d7e6dbf9c7b1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177738&Signature=VPDQgfs4hVe63HYHVsk94awshV38JHJJSA8hZmAVfojqFyIbxP~LDD76U2ekmWqBTnf8oKMyV1wNIw0cBDsf4txF2T4JRnTJRxhb0Vh0clS~vyIhwAQNBf-0A-ovjlkacNGfTmmq8Z6wxpstZugaP7QpqIUDrsH3VhVYXBzVEcgcBn~bBWN7Hv96MTRjdHZKCDbXnVBrkRdueNNRvM2Vsec9TAiAspr8qWILPR6LOppLGSsQQJ-D97DBMxZE80iXN6ZZLvvv4v41zIe18Gf1--5mxTXXONlJ5fOGaomTkB1d1DkRxSXGxqXMGU7RbXUg0eQ38eocESgxvsbA41nEIw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff briefed the Board on the fiscal implications of any moratorium on development and sewer connections, saying a formal moratorium could materially reduce revenues the city currently receives from development-related fees.

Assistant City Administrator Dan Allen and city staff described four funds and fee sources tied to development: (1) adequate facilities taxes, (2) roadway impact fees, (3) water development fees and (4) sewer development fees. Allen said Spring Hill operates under a local private act that allows the city to collect these fees and that the fees are restricted for specific capital uses.

Staff presented a worst-case illustration in which a total halt to development activity would stop collection of these development fees and related building-permit revenue. In that hypothetical scenario staff said the four development funds together could represent a little over $8 million in revenue that would not be collected if new development and connections ceased; separately, permit-related revenue in Development Services could amount to roughly $2.5 million annually and would stop while a moratorium remained in effect.

Staff and city attorney counsel emphasized the city had already been operating in a limited or “soft” moratorium in practice — staff had limited annexations and up-zonings where appropriate — and that any formal moratorium should be carefully staged and legally reviewed. City staff said some development fees must be spent within statutory or ordinance timelines and that the timing and scope of a moratorium could create cash-flow or eligibility concerns for projects tied to those restricted funds.

Why it matters: Development-fee funds are used for roads, water and sewer capacity and other capital projects. If the city stops collecting those fees, planned capital spending tied to current revenue assumptions could be delayed or require alternative funding. Staff urged that the board include moratorium scenarios in capital planning so the city does not overcommit to projects that rely on future development fees.

Board discussion and guidance: Staff recommended the board ask for funding analyses that show scenarios with a moratorium and without one, and prioritize capital projects based on those scenarios. Several aldermen said they favored a staged approach that allowed staff and developers time to work through obligations while reducing the risk of a sudden revenue shortfall.

Next steps: Staff will prepare scenario analyses and funding plans as the board continues CIP and budget discussions; staff stressed the need for stakeholder outreach and legal review before adopting any formal moratorium.","City staff told the Board that a full sewer-development moratorium could stop the collection of about $8 million in development-fee revenue and remove roughly $2.5 million in annual permit-related receipts in a worst-case scenario.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6531679,"Residents urge board to reject airport district and raise concerns about traffic, noise and environmental impacts",1698,566000,2264000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507&start=566&end=2264","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507/thumbnail_566000.jpg","/articles/6531679/Tennessee/Residents-urge-board-to-reject-airport-district-and-raise-concerns-about-traffic-noise-and-environmental-impacts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6531679-c10dc7d9662b4a7fb4cf07c852b42b89/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177738&Signature=KVd-B6Y0DDHXnoCOKvxxpGF9WGfJt8m1pp5FnW5z9vcuZEjVaJ70dJPvT1If9KZrfuptXebAYnxFNLjuUw9AOUTTWroiREpnrKoj2QeMi4aCW7daqnBi8YIA3H9YciuOH2x0QRL-OizVFfTxCpZF6EhS03Kwh9STxBh66GUHgoGHtYIWCkfZ2ky8A9L-xi7pU-dwwDn4Xzo0ZPdoX1PCwDt2YqtqtInXpBw78~sK078t5wJybI3crXlDjhR78aEBiyd25oXternHrw3Xz6u81WBTJNxUK53xsfubuq-rWY0~TYUX38qz2HutVfJdlScZJ3kt60qBXsj8F7J76oschw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During the public hearing portion of the meeting several residents voiced opposition to proposed amendments that would allow an airport district and broad industrial expansion in the Spring Hill Commerce Center master plan.

Speakers described concerns about noise, air and water quality, traffic impacts and property-rights questions related to right-of-way or eminent-domain acquisitions. Priscilla Keady, who said she lives roughly three miles east of the proposed Spring Hill Corporate Airport and holds a private pilot’s license, urged the board to consider noise impacts and environmental risks such as aircraft emissions, de-icing fluids and light pollution. She said simulations using a Gulfstream G700 and various daily-flight scenarios showed noise levels that, in her view, could make nearby homes “unacceptable for residential living.”

Other speakers from nearby Crafton Road and Jim Warren Road warned of heavy truck traffic, stormwater and runoff concerns where large warehouse parking areas would be sited above low-lying properties. John Veil said the proposed airport district border would come within a few hundred yards of some houses and warned of impacts on sleep and quality of life; Ron Neil and Richard Spont emphasized roadway capacity, drainage into Rutherford Creek and potential loss of forested buffers near the development.

Why it matters: The public hearing comments addressed the practical effects of rezoning and master-plan amendments on nearby residents, including noise exposure, traffic congestion and potential environmental effects that cross municipal and watershed boundaries. Several speakers also asked the board to protect property owners from what they said would be speculative or developer-driven land-use changes.

Board response and process: The Board heard the public comments during the public hearing. The public hearing led into the board’s later votes on the ordinance amending the Commerce Center master development plan and an extension of a large planned-development approval. The record shows the board approved the ordinance amendment (Ordinance 25-04) and the PDP extension, while residents’ public-comment concerns were entered into the record for future consideration.

What speakers asked: Residents asked the board to (a) postpone approvals until detailed infrastructure plans and traffic improvements are in place; (b) require clearer environmental protections for creeks and groundwater; and (c) clarify the city’s use of eminent domain and protections for property owners.

Speakers and positions: Richard Spont (opposed — cited traffic and eminent-domain concerns), Ron Neil (opposed — drainage and road-capacity concerns for Jim Warren Road), Priscilla Keady (opposed — noise and environmental concerns), and John Veil (opposed — noise and water-quality concerns).","Multiple residents spoke in a public hearing opposing an amendment that would add an airport district to the Spring Hill Commerce Center plan, raising noise, traffic, environmental and eminent-domain concerns. Speakers asked the board to reconsider approvals and demanded more infrastructure planning.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6531684,"Board accepts FY 2023–24 audit: unmodified opinion issued; two findings noted; city awards next-year audit contract",5232,972000,6204000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507&start=972&end=6204","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3507196-ba5d4607321b1e5c0a88cb20e1804507/thumbnail_972000.jpg","/articles/6531684/Tennessee/Board-accepts-FY-202324-audit-unmodified-opinion-issued-two-findings-noted-city-awards-next-year-audit-contract","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6531684-801ae402da2cc2e6c36198c3d6c493db/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177738&Signature=OyhndxGtJzgpoO9HASwsZROiaz6sq8rZDwoKASFgeQ3tJPDCpfkmgZHgXGAH5oq0gwD4r63XNxAkpZHpVf4mSkKDalByA-494jiUbLHpOaaFdsEgNcJy1oTkd-wxBHwfKKlyn7d6rSsbcf2CfPNuIOxz-H3XJ5x5CE07DTZphq~gzw-d1gycuLF1S4TlcBj1HSWeREZ8jaG68uuwBc4NpmBsxaxH~ujHk3rmTSMYOJFUxwQFwOKmW7Sp1a5doamkAOxfWOhfbAHvETQwxmu4-cQzV42bp0cNG0S1h8SqInA9JY6X-5c4h-Q0YjMzV~lojDrcFCu3JP1yFygeLYK~GQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The city’s independent auditors presented the fiscal year 2023–24 audit and reported an unmodified (clean) opinion on the financial statements. Matt Wood, partner with ATA (Jackson, Tennessee), told the Board that audit testing for federal grant expenditures — including ARPA funds — came back clean, but the audit identified two findings the auditors described as straightforward to correct.

Key audited figures and findings: Wood reported approximately $60 million in governmental capital asset additions and about $13 million in proprietary (water/sewer) capital additions for the year. Federal grants reported totaled about $12.2 million; testing of ARPA funds (about $12.03 million) was completed with no material exceptions. The auditors noted a management discussion-and-analysis restatement to include two months of sales-tax receivables that increased receivables by about $2.3 million. The audit also reported a net pension liability of about $5.63 million for the reported period.

The two audit findings Wood disclosed were: (1) the city did not close its trial balance and financial statements within the State of Tennessee’s preferred timeline (trial balance and required adjustments arrived late), and (2) the March 31 grant reporting deadline was not met for certain grant reports. Wood said both findings are “fairly easy to correct.”

After the presentation the board voted to accept the audit report (Resolution 25-134) by a 9–0 vote.

The board then considered a separate resolution to award the FY 2024–25 audit contract to CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) after conducting an RFQ and interview process. Finance staff said the city sought a firm with the capacity to meet audit timelines and work requirements following the FY 2023–24 issues; the board approved the CLA contract by voice vote, 9–0.

Why it matters: A clean audit opinion affirms the city’s financial statements are free of material misstatement; the two findings identify process improvements staff must make to meet reporting deadlines and month-end close timelines. The choice of a new auditor for FY 2024–25 followed a competitive procurement process, in which staff emphasized an expectation for timeline reliability.

Next steps: Staff will address the audit findings and implement the corrective actions described in the audit report. The new auditor contract covers the next fiscal-year audit and staff said CLA accepted the timeline expectations discussed in the RFQ/interview process.

Votes and formal actions: Resolution 25-134 accepting the FY 2023–24 audit approved 9–0. Resolution 25-135 awarding the FY 2024–25 audit contract to CliftonLarsonAllen LLP approved 9–0.","Independent auditors issued a clean (unmodified) opinion on the City of Spring Hill’s FY 2023–24 financial statements and reported two findings related to late trial-balance adjustments and missed grant reporting deadlines. The board accepted the audit and later awarded the FY 2024–25 audit to CliftonLarsonAllen (CLA).","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board acknowledges certified tax rate and advances budget with first readings; finance director says Williamson County reassessment will raise levy

Board approves joint development agreement with GV Spring Hills; amends Commerce Center plan amid timeline concerns

Staff warns a sewer moratorium could cut millions from development funds; board urged to plan funding scenarios

Residents urge board to reject airport district and raise concerns about traffic, noise and environmental impacts

Board accepts FY 2023–24 audit: unmodified opinion issued; two findings noted; city awards next-year audit contract