Canton reviews redevelopment tax-incentive ("blight tax") process and criteria

Canton city staff reviewed the Community Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program, commonly referred to around the state as the "blight tax," and explained how properties are identified, designated and removed under Chapter 54, Article 8.

The presentation by city staff member Mr. McClure detailed that the ordinance defines blight with reference to conditions in the Georgia Constitution and lists specific categories such as habitual code violations, life-safety issues, abandoned or unsanitary properties and repeated illegal activity. Under the ordinance, a property must meet at least two of those criteria to be eligible for the redevelopment tax designation, and aesthetics alone do not qualify a parcel as blighted, McClure said.

The process begins with an inspection or survey by the building official (which can include code enforcement or zoning staff). If staff forwards a finding, the public officer — the city manager or designee — issues a notice and schedules a hearing. McClure said the notice and hearing process is time sensitive: after staff transmits a recommended designation to the public officer there is a 45-day window to proceed, and a notice-of-hearing must be issued at least 10 days but not more than 30 days before the hearing. If the property is designated, owners may appeal to council, and city council hears those appeals.

If a property is designated, the owner may apply for removal by submitting a corrective action plan or redevelopment plan addressing repairs, demolition, restoration, timetable and financing. McClure said plans for parcels five acres or larger must also address land-use relationships, public utilities, traffic and other infrastructure and be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. Removal requests and approved corrective plans must be reinspected by the public officer. The tax application deadline for a given year is June 30; plans submitted after June 30 take effect the following tax year. McClure noted that successful remediation may result in a three-year reduction to 0.75 of the city millage rate while the property comes off the designation.

Councilmembers pressed for clarification about residential properties. McClure said the ordinance specifically excludes owner-occupied single-family residences from blight tax designation where at least one person resides in the unit; in such cases, other enforcement mechanisms and life-safety codes still apply. Councilmember Stone asked how code enforcement can act when a residence is occupied; McClure and other staff explained that the city’s other code and life-safety processes remain available and that demolition or stronger remedies require additional legal steps or court action. Several councilmembers noted the ordinance can seem counterintuitive — for example, a structure might be unsafe yet ineligible for the blight tax because it is occupied — and staff reiterated that the blight tax is an incentive aimed primarily at redevelopment of vacant or substantially abandoned properties.

McClure displayed a recently remediated property as an example and said that although the property initially looked like a candidate for the ordinance, it did not qualify for the tax because it was occupied; nonetheless it was eventually brought into compliance through existing enforcement tools and lengthy court processes, he said.

Mayor Grant and council thanked staff for the overview and asked that the city continue enforcement where appropriate. McClure noted no additional city appropriation is required to identify properties under the program beyond staff time, and he encouraged council to let staff know whether they would like more aggressive identification or outreach.

The presentation closed with staff offering to return with follow-up materials and examples after further internal review and legal consultation.