Hiram residents, officials push back against proposed state bill to dissolve the city
Loading...
Summary
At a special called meeting, Hiram residents and city staff urged action against state legislation (identified in the meeting as Senate Bill 630 / House Bill 1116) that could strip small cities of sales-tax revenue and, in the sponsors' view, allow dissolution; officials highlighted clean audits, $2.0 million in cash and the possible loss of about $1.3 million in LOST revenue.
Dozens of Hiram residents packed a special called City Council meeting and urged elected officials to fight proposed state legislation that would allow the dissolution of small municipalities.
Cynthia Stark Jones, a Hiram resident, told the council, “So I'm against, dissolving the city of Hiram,” and urged officials to make residents' voices heard. Several other speakers asked why Hiram was targeted and called on constituents to contact their state delegation.
City staff and elected leaders presented financial figures to counter the suggestion the city is insolvent. The mayor said the city currently holds about $1,000,002 in a Georgia Fund I account, roughly $400,000 in a hotel fund account and $364,000 in general fund cash, for a combined available cash balance the presentation listed as $2,000,029.01. The mayor said those reserves and recent capital projects — including a sewer project and road resurfacing — demonstrate Hiram is operating and investing in infrastructure.
City finance staff (identified in the meeting as Jody) explained a separate but related fiscal concern: proposed legislation to replace the local option sales tax (LOST) with a local homestead option sales tax (referred to in the transcript initially as House Bill 1116). Jody said the bill, as drafted, could make municipalities that do not levy property taxes ineligible for the replacement and would "strip the city" of an estimated $1.3 million in annual revenue. At one point attendees corrected the record and identified the measure under consideration in the legislative process as Senate Bill 630.
Residents framed the debate as a loss of local control and a threat to services and employment. One longtime resident and business owner, speaking as Doctor Carpenter, said he employs 36 people and credited the city with supporting his business. Another attendee, Ash Howe, said attempts to reach the bill's sponsor had produced "radio silence" and asked whether the council would permit organized constituent demonstrations.
City representatives also highlighted the human and service impacts that could follow dissolution. Council and staff said the county would inherit road, water and police responsibilities, and the mayor said county leaders had told him they did not want the additional workload and that policing needs would require hiring dozens of deputies to cover the city.
Officials laid out next steps: they said the council expects a series of public hearings and urged residents to contact state legislators. Daniel Bavenport, who distributed flyers at the meeting, asked citizens to ask lawmakers to pause action on the bill while audit and financial information are gathered and presented.
The meeting closed after an invitation for further constituent engagement; the mayor asked for a motion to adjourn and thanked attendees. No formal council action on the substance of the legislation was taken at the special meeting.
Why it matters: The bill under discussion would change how certain local revenues are distributed and, according to city staff, could remove a source of funding that many small cities rely on. Residents and local officials said that if the measure proceeds as drafted it could shift costs to counties and reduce local control.
