Peachtree City is facing a potential loss of sales tax revenues in future years thanks to population growth shifts recorded by the 2010 Census.
That could translate into a significant loss for the city, to the point that Councilwoman Kim Learnard characterized the issue Thursday night as the most important facing the city for the next decade.
The details will begin to unfold in coming weeks and months as city officials interface with their counterparts with the county and other city governments here in Fayette. Under Georgia law, the Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) revenue sharing percentages must be renegotiated every 10 years based on the latest Census population figures.
“I can’t imagine any one issue that is more important to every Peachtree City citizen for the next decade than how sales tax dollars are allocated to our city,” Learnard said at Thursday night’s city council meeting.
Councilman George Dienhart agreed, saying that local governments will be “fighting for our slice of the pie” and the result could require a property tax increase if the city loses sales tax revenue.
Council ultimately voted 4-1 to create a negotiating committee consisting of the city manager, city finance director and city attorney, all of whom will represent the city in the LOST negotiations. The dissenting vote came from Mayor Don Haddix, who challenged council’s authority to create a committee.
Council’s action technically approved an ordinance that created the committee, but Haddix insists that the city charter spells out that he has the right to create a committee and that power is not granted to council.
Haddix also noted that under the city charter, he is to sit ex-oficio on any committee conducting city business.
City Attorney Ted Meeker said while there are some legal questions as to whether council can use an ordinance to create a committee, there is some support for that being a legitimate action.
“I don’t have a definitive answer,” Meeker said. “The only way to get a definitive answer would be to get one from a judge.”
Dienhart said he felt the matter came down to council making a decision “to do what’s best for the city.” To have a council member on that team would shortchange the city because council members don’t have the “information at their fingertips every day” needed to be successful in the negotiations, Dienhart added.
Learnard said council needed to make sure that city staff was at the table appropriately for the negotiations so the city would have “the best people who have the financial expertise and steep understanding of our budget, who can negotiate in good faith and keep positive. People who can work well with others, establish good relationships and bring factual information back to council.”
Haddix suggested that if council passed the ordinance and appointed a committee, the matter could be subject to legal challenge. When asked if he would challenge it in court, Haddix noted that any citizen could do so if they chose.
“That’s clearly not in the best interest of the city,” Dienhart said.
City Attorney Ted Meeker noted that all of the committee’s meetings would have to be advertised by the city since they are conducting city business as appointed by council.
