Effingham County keeps millage at 5.596 after public hearing; board cites exemptions and new construction

Effingham County commissioners on Sept. 25 held a public hearing and voted unanimously to keep the county maintenance-and-operations millage at 5.596, the same rate used last year.

County Finance Director Mark Barnes told the board the proposed 5.596 rate is “below the rollback rate” calculated by the state form and that the county faces a modest shortfall tied to higher-than-expected exemptions and shifts in existing property values. "If adopted tonight, the millage rate of 5.596 will be the sixth year in a row that the county has reduced the rate or kept it the same," Barnes said during his presentation.

Barnes and other staff traced the discrepancy between the published digest growth and the rollback calculation to changes in exemptions and the way state law requires the total digest to be reported. The county’s existing-property values, after exemptions were applied, declined relative to last year by about $11.6 million, while new construction boosted the overall digest. Barnes said the rollback rate as calculated on the Georgia PT-32.1 form would have been 5.612 for 2025; the board chose the lower 5.596 rate the county recommended.

Why it matters

The millage rate determines how much property tax revenue the county collects from its unincorporated area and is a principal source of funding for county services. By keeping the rate at 5.596 rather than adopting the mathematically higher rollback rate, the board preserved the same tax rate as the prior year while accepting a small reduction in projected revenue for existing parcels.

Key details from the presentation and discussion

- Revenue impact and balancing steps: Barnes told the board the difference between the budgeted revenue estimate and the current digest numbers amounts to about $165,000–$170,000. He said staff expects to manage the shortfall by delaying certain hires and collecting somewhat higher-than-expected interest revenue from the county’s fund balance, following the board’s fund-balance policy.

- Exemptions and the digest: Staff said roughly $29,000,000 of property value was affected by a new statewide “floating” homestead exemption that, in year one, produced a larger exemption than the county’s existing Carter-Burns homestead exemption; as a result some homes were shifted to the higher exemption. Separately, a change in state law raising the business personal property filing exemption from $7,500 to $20,000 eliminated about $10,000,000 in taxable business personal property for 2025, staff said. Those exemption changes, combined with decreases in some industrial property reassessments, produced the unusual situation where the total digest (which by law must include new construction) rose while the existing-property digest used to compute the rollback decreased.

- Digest composition: Staff said residential property continues to be the majority of the digest (about 58% in the presentation). Industrial property now comprises roughly 20% of the digest and therefore even modest industrial revaluations affect revenues more than in the past.

- Abatements, pilot payments and the IDA: Commissioners discussed tax abatements and payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) administered through the Industrial Development Authority (IDA). Staff reported that a few legacy PILOT/abatement agreements remain in place (for example, agreements involving Georgia Power and previous large industrial investments) and that pilot payments are generally remitted to the county and other taxing entities on a pro rata basis in the absence of a signed distribution agreement. Staff said three legacy agreements use individualized formulas and that county staff are seeking a signed distribution agreement with the IDA to formalize pro rata distribution. The board asked staff to continue outreach to the IDA, the school board and municipalities so all parties will be comfortable signing the agreement.

- Industrial special tax districts: The county has three industrial special tax districts; staff said those districts’ rates remain unchanged for 2025 and that together they produce roughly $1 million annually, with the largest district accounting for about $600,000 in annual receipts. Commissioners noted most recent warehouse projects have located in the county without abatements, and that older abatements are “rolling off” over the next several years.

- Impact fees and schools: Commissioners asked whether the county can require developers to pay fees that fund schools. Staff said school impact fees are not currently part of the county’s impact-fee program and that reinstating or revising impact fees would require an analysis and consultant work. Commissioners and staff discussed the role of E-SPLOST (the education special-purpose local-option sales tax) and other local revenue tools; staff said school capital projects are funded through E-SPLOST and that debt (when issued) is paid through those dedicated revenues.

Public hearing and vote

The board opened and closed the public hearing with no members of the public speaking. Commissioner (motion maker not specified in the record) moved to approve the millage rate as presented and the motion was seconded; the roll call showed all commissioners present voted in favor and the motion carried.

What was not decided or left for follow-up

Commissioners asked staff to pursue a signed distribution agreement with the IDA and to follow up with the school board and municipalities about co-signing or otherwise formalizing the PILOT distribution. Staff also said it will present more detailed impact-fee analysis and bring options to the board at a future retreat.

Ending

The board adopted Resolution Number 20532 (Levy of Property Taxes and County Millage Certification) and directed staff to submit the required PT-32.1 forms to the state as required by law. Staff said they will continue to monitor revenues and provide updates if the county must revise budgeted hiring or rely on additional fund-balance policy draws.