East Point budget presentation flags $14 million in fund‑balance draws; council keeps hearing open amid debate over cuts and revenue ideas

City Manager Jones presented East Point’s proposed fiscal year 2027 budget on May 18, telling the City Council that a decade of optimistic revenue projections and year‑end adjustments had left the city relying on roughly $13.9 million drawn from pooled cash or unassigned funds without clear council approvals. Jones said audits and better accounting controls are an immediate priority to restore confidence and enable financing for major capital projects.

Jones front‑loaded the presentation with what he described as the city’s top strategic goals — fiscal sustainability, public safety and a five‑year capital improvement plan — and then outlined an array of headwinds: a recent expansion of the homestead exemption under House Bill 581 that he estimated would cut property tax receipts by about $1.9 million, a rollback in the adopted millage rate that reduced revenue by roughly $2.7 million, and a multiyear suppression of summer electric rates that Jones said cost the power fund about $1.4 million per year (roughly $7 million over five years). “Over a 10‑year period roughly $13.9 million had come out of fund balance,” Jones said, adding that he could not find council approvals or matching year‑end budget amendments to document those withdrawals.

Why it matters: Jones said the missing documentation and delayed audits have practical effects: lenders and rating agencies want certified financial statements before they will underwrite bonds for big projects such as a planned multi‑generational recreation center and swimming pool. Without current audits, those financings will be harder and more expensive.

What Jones proposed and what council asked for: The manager presented a conservative revenue projection for 2026–27 and a set of cost‑control measures that include deferring some capital projects, reducing nonessential travel and training and cutting community concert funding by roughly 50%. He also advanced several revenue‑enhancement ideas — better short‑term rental and lodging reporting, a tax‑sale program to collect delinquent property taxes and banking/treasury optimization — and said staff will return with detailed proposals and contracts for council review.

Public reaction: The meeting included a formal public hearing on the budget. Speakers expressed a mix of support and concern. Resident Greg Fan suggested nonresident hauler franchise fees as an alternative to raising resident fees. Several speakers, including Linda Fannon Watts and Marie Terry, pressed the council to protect emergency assistance, home‑repair funding for seniors and other social‑service programs previously supported by ARPA dollars. “If you keep cutting emergency assistance, you are hurting our seniors,” one commenter said.

Council discussion: Council members pressed staff for more detail on specific items. Councilwoman Codwell pressed staff on whether senior assistance that appears zeroed out in the budget had been moved to another department; Jones and Interim Finance Director Cartwright said those activities were proposed to move into economic development at a reduced level. Multiple members pressed for detailed line‑item back‑up, a six‑month review and the ability to restore programs if revenues outperform projections.

Audits and next steps: Several council members emphasized audits as the top priority. Jones said he expects city audits to be currentable on an aggressive schedule and that the city has contracted for audit work; he warned that overlapping audit years is not permitted by the current auditor’s engagement rules. The council approved procedural motions to close the public hearing and to proceed with further budget discussion; staff said they will return with a revised draft, supporting schedules, and vendor contracts (for any revenue‑collection services) for subsequent review.

What to watch: the council asked staff to come back with (a) detailed line‑item backup and clarifications on where programs (particularly senior and emergency assistance) are funded, (b) proposed contract terms and legal review for any revenue‑collection vendors, (c) audit‑status updates and (d) progress reports on whether revenues over‑ or under‑perform relative to conservative projections. The council also approved a separate change order to the city audit contract to pay for additional work to complete outstanding audits.

Ending: The council did not adopt a final budget at the May 18 meeting; staff will bring back additional documentation and proposed amendments for further review and a subsequent vote.