Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney outlines sales-tax referendum options after Georgia special session
Summary
City Attorney Lawson Elthos told the Griffin Board that a recent Georgia special session produced competing sales-tax approaches (identified in the briefing with transcript terms), explained statutory differences and tight deadlines for a local referendum, and warned the board to coordinate with the county before placing any tax measure on a November ballot.
City Attorney Lawson Elthos briefed the Griffin Board of Commissioners on a recent special session of the Georgia General Assembly and what it could mean for a local sales-tax referendum.
Elthos said the special session included measures beyond the original redistricting call and named two competing approaches discussed in the legislature (the transcript used the terms “FLOS” and an alternative he called an “El host”). He said the main practical difference for local governments is how sales-tax revenue would be apportioned among the county and municipalities and that jurisdictions must reach intergovernmental agreements before county-level steps can authorize elections. “You still have to have a referendum to implement,” Elthos told the board.
Why it matters: the board is considering sales-tax proceeds that officials had hoped would pay for local capital projects, including two new fire stations referenced during the meeting. Elthos said the legal and procedural path differs between the two state approaches and highlighted narrow timing windows: an intergovernmental agreement and local act are typically required before a county can authorize the call of a referendum, and the board discussed a July 12 cutoff for getting paperwork in place for the November ballot.
Elthos and commissioners also discussed fiscal-impact examples presented to county decision-makers: under one distribution they discussed, a 1% rate on an illustrative $15 million base produced figures shown to the board as roughly $5.7 million to the city and $9.3 million to the county; an alternative formula tied to homestead-population shares would have produced a much smaller city share in their example. Elthos said that, because of calendar constraints (an upcoming July travel schedule and the July 4 holiday), a November referendum may be difficult to finalize and that an early-year referendum next spring could be more feasible if the board chooses to pursue it.
Board discussion raised policy and equity concerns, including whether landlords would pass any property-tax relief or sales-tax savings on to renters and how sales taxes affect people on fixed incomes. The city attorney warned the board to coordinate closely with county staff; commissioners said they would monitor county action and could call a special meeting if the county moves forward.
Next steps: Elthos recommended the board watch county negotiations and allowed that a referendum could still be scheduled next year if parties cannot finalize agreements in time for the November ballot.
