Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bradley County mayor presents budget that could raise property taxes about 15 cents; commissioners seek clearer, itemized impacts
Summary
Mayor Davis summarized department requests totaling roughly $6.84 million (or $7.74 million including a proposed 3% across‑the‑board raise) and said that, after projected revenue offsets, the package would amount to about a 15‑cent countywide property tax increase; commissioners asked for itemized impacts and earmarked 'pennies' per department to present to constituents.
Mayor Davis presented a preliminary aggregation of department budget requests and asked the Bradley County Commission for direction on how to balance rising costs.
Davis said the total of all department requests currently totals $6,839,772 and that ‘‘by adding a mere 3% . . . the total comes to 7,739,772.’’ After accounting for projected revenue increases, he estimated that would equate to ‘‘roughly a 15‑cent tax increase countywide.’’ Davis urged commissioners to give him policy direction now so his staff can spend the next several months preparing a balanced proposal.
The mayor also described three options for the fire department’s portion of the budget; taking the least expensive option would add approximately $795,318 to the budget and would increase the fire portion by ‘‘3.15 cents’’ (as presented by the mayor), with a larger combined outside‑the‑city figure discussed in the meeting (about 18.15 cents when other items are included).
Commissioners pressed for clarity on assumptions and timeline. Several asked what revenue growth figure the mayor had used; Davis said he had plugged in the best available estimate for March — about 2% growth — and that he typically waits until May 1 to finalize revenue projections before presenting a more accurate June 1 balanced proposal. He cautioned that expected growth ‘‘isn’t going to cover the $8 million requested increase very much at all.’’
Several commissioners argued that tax increases are the primary local revenue lever to meet service demands, pointing to pressure in the sheriff’s office, EMS and schools. One commissioner urged that the commission break proposed increases into easily explained, earmarked increments (‘‘pennies’’) so members can explain to constituents what specific services or purchases each increment would pay for.
During the exchange the mayor framed the choices for the commission bluntly: either give his office clear direction about which requests to fund in full or allow him to balance the budget on currently available revenues. He told the commission, ‘‘I need direction so I know what to do with the budget proposal,’’ and added that if nothing is specified he will prepare a balanced budget using available revenues.
The discussion also referenced prior county tax measures that funded major projects — the justice center and school pods — and several commissioners said those precedents illustrated the value of tying increments to visible projects or services when seeking public support.
Next steps: the mayor said he will wait for clearer guidance and for updated revenue projections in May; the commission did not adopt any budgetary motions or final figures at this session.
