Fulton County sets 2025 general‑fund millage at 8.87 after hours of public comment; commissioners debate jail consent decree costs

Fulton County commissioners voted 6–1 on Aug. 6 to set the 2025 general‑fund millage at 8.87 mills, rejecting a proposal that county staff and some commissioners had earlier allowed to be advertised at a higher ceiling. The vote came after more than three hours of in‑person public comment and a lengthy midyear budget briefing by county finance staff.

Why it matters: The millage decision determines the county portion of property tax bills for thousands of homeowners and renters. The discussion also surfaced a broader budgeting question: county financial staff told the commission the midyear review projects roughly $69 million more available this year than assumed when the budget was adopted, but commissioners said the county faces uncertain, multiyear obligations including a federal consent decree tied to jail conditions.

Public comments and pressure

Dozens of residents, municipal officials and advocacy groups urged commissioners not to raise property taxes this year. State Rep. Deborah Silcox said the advertised 12.49% effective increase “will disproportionately affect senior citizens and those that are disadvantaged in our community.” Roswell Council member Lee Hills warned the hike would add “roughly $300 average per household” for Roswell residents and said rising local tax bills were already driving people and businesses to lower‑tax counties.

Several speakers described personal hardship. Maria Gaudio told commissioners, “Personally, my property taxes have doubled in the last two years.” Matt Ronzak, a Fulton County resident, said, “The public has said loud and clear, they do not support this,” and asked the board to roll back the rate.

Midyear budget review: numbers and tradeoffs

County finance staff presented a midyear review showing the general‑fund revenue and expenditure picture under two millage scenarios. At the currently adopted rate of 8.87 mills, staff projected roughly $930 million in total revenue and about $936 million in projected spending for 2025, producing an operating underrun relative to the adopted budget that staff summarized as about $69 million of net positive variance from the January assumptions (approximately $15 million in better revenues and a roughly $54 million underrun on expenditures). That projection would leave an estimated year‑end general‑fund balance near $234 million (above the board policy target of $165 million).

Using the advertised, higher rate of 9.87 mills, staff projected roughly $1.0 billion in revenue and the same projected expenditures; that scenario would increase the projected year‑end fund balance to about $313 million.

Sharon Whitmore, the county chief financial officer, cautioned the figures were projections and that actual year‑end results depend on several variables the county still cannot fully quantify, including taxpayer appeals, collection rates and the pace of departmental hiring that affects personnel savings.

Consent decree, hospitals and long‑range planning

The largest recurring theme among commissioners during deliberations was the county’s legal and service obligations beyond a single fiscal year. Commissioners said they were balancing near‑term relief for residents against long‑term obligations that could require additional resources.

Commissioner Moe Ivory framed the question as a present crisis: “We are in the middle of a crisis, not a future one,” he said, citing a federal consent decree on jail conditions and the county’s need to respond. Ivory said he believed additional resources would be required to comply with court‑ordered fixes and to address health‑care gaps created by hospital closures.

Several commissioners pushed back on the timing and the budgeting process. Commissioner Khadija Abdul Rahman said she would not support increasing the rate without clearer, documented needs and expressed concern about accountability for spending. Commissioner Sharon Barrett, while acknowledging the consent decree, said the board had lacked full information in June and that the midyear review provided clearer numbers.

Action taken and related approvals

- The board adopted the general‑fund millage at 8.87 mills (motion to set 8.87; vote 6 yeas, 1 nay). Commissioners recorded the vote publicly at the Aug. 6 meeting. - The board also approved several administrative and budget items on the agenda, including amendments to the midyear budget soundings and a budget soundings item to increase spending authority for the county’s risk management software maintenance by $25,000. - The board unanimously approved a childcare pilot benefits package for county employees and amended the pilot to waive the program’s 10‑mile radius limitation for eligible dependents with documented special needs.

Executive‑session outcomes (summary)

After a closed session, the commission announced public actions taken under authority delegated in executive session, including approvals related to litigation and personnel: - Approval of a request for representation on specified matters (vote 5–0). - Approval of settlement authority for a Purdue Pharma opioid‑related settlement (vote 5–0). - Multiple settlement‑authority approvals and contract approvals reported out of executive session passed by recorded votes (each reported 5–0); these included a recruitment‑services contract and the county manager employment contract described below.

Process and next steps

The vote to set the millage completed the county’s statutory millage adoption for 2025. Commissioners and staff noted outstanding issues that will continue to affect future budgets, including final costs associated with the jail consent decree, personnel and health‑plan projections for 2026, and the county’s capital‑planning choices. Several commissioners urged development of a multiyear budget plan so the board and public can see how present choices affect future tax levels.

Ending note

The board’s decision preserves the county’s current general‑fund share of tax bills for 2025. Commissioners noted that the choice does not eliminate future fiscal pressure: several members said they expect the county will need to revisit the revenue picture as the consent‑decree requirements and other multiyear obligations become clearer.

Votes at a glance

- Adopt 2025 general‑fund millage: set general‑fund millage at 8.87 mills. Motion: set 8.87 mills. Vote: 6 yeas, 1 nay. - Childcare pilot program benefits and amendment: approved employee reimbursement pilot (up to $500/month for qualifying employees; budget $300,000 for July–Dec 2025) and amended to waive the 10‑mile radius for special‑needs dependents. Vote: unanimous. - Midyear budget soundings: approved an increase in spending authority for risk‑management software maintenance (+$25,000). Vote: unanimous. - Executive‑session outcomes (reported): authorization to represent the county in specified matters (vote 5–0); grant settlement authority for Purdue Pharma opioid settlement (vote 5–0); approved recruitment‑services contract not to exceed $788,000 (vote 5–0); approved employment contract for county manager Richard Anderson (four‑year term, $371,000 annual salary) (vote 5–0). These items were approved after closed‑session review and reported out at the meeting.

What I’m watching

- The final, itemized cost estimates from the independent monitor and sheriff for consent‑decree compliance (staff said partial‑year costs may be lower than full‑year figures but the total multiyear cost is not yet finalized). - Any formal appeals filed with the tax‑assessment office that would reduce 2025 collection compared with the midyear projection. - Follow‑up budget soundings or special sessions to convert projected underruns into targeted departmental funding or reserves.

(See “Votes at a glance” for a concise list of motions and vote counts reported at the meeting.)