[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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",[32,75,87],{"_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":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6536418,"mediaKeyId","3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03","parentId",3796364,"title","Clergy, community leaders and residents protest city manager's firing and call for review","audioSeconds",2454,"startMs",9624000,"endMs",7170000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03&start=9624&end=7170","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03/thumbnail_9624000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6536418/Columbus/Muscogee-County/Georgia/Clergy-community-leaders-and-residents-protest-city-managers-firing-and-call-for-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536418-92251ae10c6584d2a2a8bc39296f2845/orig.mp4?Expires=1771194208&Signature=Pi68zNoSoAmBe9hGSDQyZ22G404kTapEQH7wWVJqlWyRL913GtQ3NyGWQLnwCLBJP5NSlXpMnuoJcstlcH4M1SlQEfLzN4JEQEl5ekCVEJ2wwmiQiQyTMjvd7JVNwb0CpNC1fF4TmomRYNoHWqDUM~Kam7HQnBf8j-Dh-WT4ySkl4PRuKLiXBVzDXW2Neig5KJTlklsc8CPZrBt3lp6UDY2E-3qI8cTy6ihit--HpbeP4Kl9kAnpJubjzVtem~An~4qOKhDLjyPNEAxPzEWbhCfkx6Xtf6BXI8beya8HYOCnMcN05Y7QQHRqFavlxsMxX5~BdAh3DMVzzgDdS7c-rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Columbus","date","2025-06-10T20:54:34Z","article","A series of clergy leaders, community advocates and residents used the June 10 public comment period at Columbus City Council to criticize the council's earlier decision to terminate City Manager Isaiah Hugley and to call for accountability and further review.

Speakers and claims: Johnny Flakes, identified as president of the International Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, said the alliance “adamantly disagree[s] with the firing of city manager Isaiah Hugley,” called the action “reckless” and said it showed “racial vindictive motives” by a majority of council members. Flakes also cited Hugley’s administration in the WalletHub ranking that had listed Columbus highly for efficiency.

Other speakers echoed those concerns. Radia Mallard, a community advocate, said the city “is full of oppression” and urged elected officials to examine their practices; Lucas Melton said the firing will fuel civic engagement and promised organized response; resident Theresa Elamin and others praised Hugley’s service and urged the council to consider the consequences of the action.

What the meeting record shows: several speakers said a May 27 council vote had terminated Hugley by a recorded 7–3 vote; those statements were made during the public‑comment period and were attributed by the speakers themselves. The council’s public record in this meeting noted the body had held an executive session before public comments and that personnel and litigation were discussed; the clerk stated “no votes were taken during the meeting” (referring to the June 10 executive session). Several speakers nonetheless described the May 27 outcome and urged reconsideration, transparency and an accounting of the decision.

Requests from speakers: speakers asked for transparency, restoration or review of the termination decision, and greater community engagement on major personnel decisions. The IMA called the termination “financially irresponsible” and urged the council to consider the community impact.

Ending: the meeting’s public comment transcript records substantial public opposition to the earlier termination decision and requests from clergy and civic leaders for further review. Council members did not take action during the June 10 open session to reverse or otherwise change personnel decisions; speakers asked the council to respond in follow‑up meetings and through the legislative and civic processes.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Columbus Ga City Council Meeting 06-10-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Clergy and community leaders used the June 10 public comment period to protest the termination of City Manager Isaiah Hugley and to urge the council to review and reverse the decision.","taxTitle","Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia","taxId",4892,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536423,"Columbus council adopts most of proposed 2025 budget; separates Integrated Waste and CDBG items for separate votes",208,5282000,5490000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03&start=5282&end=5490","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03/thumbnail_5282000.jpg","/articles/6536423/Columbus/Muscogee-County/Georgia/Columbus-council-adopts-most-of-proposed-2025-budget-separates-Integrated-Waste-and-CDBG-items-for-separate-votes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536423-0314ca4689d41dccb244eef79118c708/orig.mp4?Expires=1771194208&Signature=oUMu7EhdEIpTfSHMNFzX~XOIZ7SY5Jslob6QUoETmaoz0QAYR~PeNawCtSGlCA9myGedkT2HJOIW7oHqaxMWjKeNHAgWSxhm6MgzEdRkVUYlXh6sNNCl0xbRYmUlN8a-yqMwRpIdteawG9S0i1bykjxHjKtHoMilAtcuDh4GKl5afSr7o-LovdXSs3~xU47aMDRSFLIeenoVw7Y-zc~CH9Z2q9qGmePqRZF0HVA-O5wgasQxuM5iMQ-ahKOm69gM8PbCg~a8ENB1aMOKm2Bcd6cp~M1zQjw2ux1nmS-uaHnJxOQM31rIrLUHk~~xfv5DB2uJCNija2s6PMa0hh4Dfw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Columbus City Council on June 10 advanced the city's FY26 budget package and several other routine items after splitting two sections for separate votes.

What the council did: the body voted to adopt an ordinance that contained the bulk of the proposed budget but explicitly separated out Section 7 (the Integrated Waste Fund) and Section 19 (the Community Development Block Grant proposed budget) for separate consideration. The council then took separate votes: it approved the Integrated Waste Fund budget adjustment (the meeting cited an Integrated Waste Fund budget total of $18,600,000) and then approved the remaining operating and non‑operating budget items, pension contributions and related financial actions the council had grouped together.

Why split sections: councilors said they wanted additional detail before committing to fee changes within integrated waste, notably a $3 per rate adjustment under discussion; Councilor Toya Tucker asked staff for salary‑savings breakdowns that might allow a smaller fee increase. Staff and the city attorney said the budget can be amended later but cautioned about pension and health allocation math when removing positions or saving projected salary funds.

Other votes and actions:
- The council approved non‑operating budgets and a package of pension plan contributions, including public safety plans and related trust items, by omnibus vote.
- The council approved a contract extension for concessionaire services at the government center and other procurement items listed on the manager's agenda.
- On zoning items, several rezoning petitions were set to return for vote next week; a petition for a plasma collection center (CSL Plasma) at 42510 Winton Road proceeded through a special exception and was approved after staff and council discussion about community outreach and site improvements.
- The council adopted a resolution amending purchasing rules (resolution language referenced as correction to a heading for 070-25) to add an extra exception for party/ broker awards under certain purchasing conditions.

Votes at a glance (key outcomes recorded in the meeting):
- Motion to adopt the ordinance except for Sections 7 and 19 — approved by voice vote.
- Motion to approve Section 7 (Integrated Waste Fund; $18,600,000) — motion passed; the minutes record two no votes on the item.
- Non‑operating budgets, pension contributions, and related items — approved on omnibus vote.
- Special exception for plasma center at 42510 Winton Road (CSL Plasma) — approved.
- Resolution amending procurement/purchasing exception (070-25 correction) — approved.

What councilors requested next: staff were asked to produce a department‑by‑department breakdown of projected salary savings so council could consider reducing integrated waste increases, and to return with detailed figures at the next work session. Councilors also discussed whether to revisit rates mid‑year if additional savings materialize.

Context and constraints: staff noted some fee changes take effect July 1 and that mid‑year adjustments are possible but operationally complex. The city attorney and finance director warned that unfunding positions can have follow‑on pension and health‑benefit consequences that must be built into budget estimates.

Ending: the council passed the bulk of the budget and moved to separate consideration for particular fees and CDBG allocations; follow‑up work sessions and staff reports were requested before any further rate reductions.","Columbus City Council adopted most of the proposed FY26 budget on June 10, separating the Integrated Waste Fund and CDBG sections for separate votes and later approving the Integrated Waste adjustment and other non‑operating items.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536428,"Columbus holds taxpayer bill of rights hearing as residents, landlords press assessors on rising valuations and millage",753,307000,1060000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03&start=307&end=1060","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3796364-22fd8d1f5dbb74d8f7dba89d13ee6e03/thumbnail_307000.jpg","/articles/6536428/Columbus/Muscogee-County/Georgia/Columbus-holds-taxpayer-bill-of-rights-hearing-as-residents-landlords-press-assessors-on-rising-valuations-and-millage","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536428-4beab0a65680f2835d5124732bf0ce88/orig.mp4?Expires=1771194208&Signature=JVjm3y8GKw1ZFgDtnXpBlqjMEA0z~D900pDXZS34En7eNeQ8l9IerU6onGRTzCo8NyT3FB2XCvzITKRLub7j7BrOngeyyJAn8uPkdOXLW4kbCorllJ2o-L-3Cv2t6MP8muVn24jqpKfGTM2qFy6kIN9V1suQIkYcQGJ1ZgQciKmY27rhMOoyT9zVOIeD-VyHtNUAtWWFbXhTeCtX0q-KHRRRyaj20r5c-rD~4kPJORMmbr1LzXRjBGetrkM6qOJGUMBds2d9a-BOzFd2inNfexG2Od7qoNQD1sYsNQnT58XXIOJ4ZdlZq~mFon-gYtJEZdmCK4sMWJMdkl6H8qLvvA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Columbus, Georgia held its annual taxpayer bill of rights public hearing on June 10, where city officials and dozens of residents and property owners debated why assessed values are rising and how that interacts with the city's millage rate.

The hearing is the final public notice required by OCGA §48-5-32.1 when a jurisdiction's estimated tax digest rises; city attorney Clifton Faye opened the item and invited the chief appraiser and finance staff to explain the changes. Chief appraisal staff said the mayor's proposed millage rate is the same as last year and that the apparent tax increases for many property owners result primarily from higher assessed values, not a higher millage rate.

Why it matters: dozens of residents, investors and council members said sharp valuation increases are driving higher rents, reducing landlords' ability to maintain housing and worsening affordability for tenants. Investors and landlords said sudden three-year revaluations after a homestead or freeze expires can produce large, concentrated increases that are effectively passed to renters. Council members requested options for legislative changes and local relief as they considered the budget.

City explanation: the tax office told the council it uses the three mass-appraisal approaches required by Georgia law — market (sales), cost (replacement) and income (capitalized rent) — and selects the method(s) most supported by available data for each property type. As the chief appraiser put it: “We have to consider all 3 methods. ... We have to select the 1 that we have the best data for and that is the most appropriate methodology for that property.” The assessor’s office said income increases on rental units are one measurable driver of higher valuations where reliable income data exist.

Public testimony and council concerns: investor Jason Hilton, who said he owns about 1,300 houses, told the council his properties saw some assessments “increase by 2 to 3x” when freezes ended and that owners sometimes must choose between raising rents or cutting maintenance. “If you buy a house and I bought plenty of houses where the property taxes that they're paying were $40 or $50 ... I'm like, well, no wonder I'm paying $6,000,” Hilton said.

Several council members questioned how much the assessor can adjust methods and urged staff to bring options to the council. Councilor Lehi Davis called the dynamic “a vicious cycle” when rents, valuations and taxes feed one another; Councilor Travis Chambers asked staff to produce a plan addressing the investor/tenant dynamic and potential relief for renters. Councilor Charmaine Crabb urged persistent appeals where owners believe valuations are incorrect.

Appeals and technical detail: the tax assessor reiterated the appeal process available to property owners, explaining board of equalization review and the possibility of court review. The assessor explained that some properties are subject to a three-year homestead/appeal “freeze” (often reported as a 2‑99(c) lock in transcript remarks) so adjustments can appear concentrated when the lock expires. The assessor also described common adjustments (effective age, neighborhood factors, depreciation) and said the office is audited annually by the Georgia Department of Audits and every three years by the Department of Revenue.

Requests to the state and next steps: multiple council members urged adding items to the legislative agenda, including limits on annual assessment increases (a cap such as 12% was discussed by councilors as a state policy option) and a review of the income/cap-rate approach. The council asked the assessor for examples — high, low and mid-case properties from the investor who spoke — and scheduled a follow-up meeting and work session to examine salary savings, budget tradeoffs and possible rate adjustments tied to the adopted budget.

What officials could not or did not say: the assessor repeatedly noted that state law sets methodologies and auditing standards and that the assessor’s office has limited discretion to depart from those rules. Staff and councilors also clarified that the assessor’s office does not set millage rates; those are set separately and appear on notices prepared by the tax commissioner’s office.

Ending: council members said they will pursue a combination of local work sessions (to study budget tradeoffs and rates) and requests to the state legislature (to consider statutory caps or changes to valuation practice). The assessor encouraged residents to use the office’s public data tools and the appeals process if they believe their valuation is incorrect.

","Columbus held its required taxpayer bill of rights hearing on June 10, where the city’s tax assessor and chief appraiser explained why assessed values rose and residents and councilors pressed for options to limit the financial effects on renters and investor‑owned housing.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Clergy, community leaders and residents protest city manager's firing and call for review

Columbus council adopts most of proposed 2025 budget; separates Integrated Waste and CDBG items for separate votes

Columbus holds taxpayer bill of rights hearing as residents, landlords press assessors on rising valuations and millage