Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Spending Splost topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clayton County officials set accelerated SPLOST timeline, ask commissioners for individual project meetings
Summary
County staff outlined a compressed SPLOST 2026 schedule meant to meet state election deadlines, asking commissioners to meet individually to pare a $600–655 million project list ahead of an August referendum call.
Clayton County officials told the Board of Commissioners on Tuesday they are preparing an accelerated timeline to place a Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) question on the November ballot and asked commissioners to meet individually to prioritize a large project list.
The county’s deputy chief operating officer for development, Landry Murchison, said the county must notify the elections board and meet statutory notice windows to remain in compliance with state timelines. “There’s $600,000,000 worth of projects on this list, that we need to go through with you,” Murchison said, adding staff has been working with municipal partners and the county SPLOST team to refine projects.
Murchison described a compressed schedule built around an Elections Board meeting moved to Friday, Aug. 8; he asked the board to hold a special called meeting the morning of Aug. 8 so the board can pass a resolution calling the referendum and still meet the 30‑day minimum required by law. He also reiterated staff’s goal to bring commissioners a comprehensive recommendation at the regular Aug. 5 meeting and a follow‑up on the Aug. 8 special meeting if needed.
Why it matters: the timetable determines whether a SPLOST question can legally appear on the November ballot and affects which projects can be financed by local sales taxes or routed to other funding mechanisms. Murchison told commissioners that, given the scale of needs, staff plans to use the Public Facilities Authority for projects that can move faster via that vehicle so SPLOST proceeds can address other priorities.
Details the board heard
- Notice and calendar: Murchison said the county notified municipal partners June 23 but could not convene all city officials until July 8, which complied with meeting‑notice minimums but risked missing the 30‑day minimum for a referendum call. The Elections Board’s moved meeting on Aug. 8 prompted staff to request a special called morning session that same day so the county’s resolution could precede the elections board action and keep the county in compliance.
- Project list and scope: Murchison said staff’s internal list contains roughly $600–655 million of projects and that staff will “whittle $655 into $153” through commissioner priorities, bond capacity and by shifting eligible items to the Public Facilities Authority. He asked to meet individually with each commissioner, along with legal and budget staff, so they can finalize priorities before the Aug. 5 presentation.
- Municipal coordination: staff reported meeting with municipal partners and said mayors’ offices will continue to discuss SPLOST proposals; any municipal changes could affect the county list.
Board discussion and next steps
Commissioners asked for a finalized list before Aug. 5 and for staff to circulate materials in advance. Commissioner discussion was limited during the presentation; Murchison said he will schedule one‑on‑one meetings with each commissioner within the week. The presentation closes with staff’s stated plan: present recommendations Aug. 5, reconvene with any alterations on Aug. 8, complete the resolution and submit files for publication by Aug. 13.
The board did not vote on the SPLOST project list Tuesday; staff characterized the meeting as status and direction‑setting and an operational request for special meeting scheduling.
