Wednesday, December 6, 2000
|
Wednesday, December 6, 2000 |
|
Unresolved: city-county tax equity
By DAVE HAMRICK
Fayette County and its cities are further than ever from a resolution of their dispute over tax equity. During their work session today, county commissioners may or may not discuss a request from local cities for mediation in the dispute. Cities formally asked for voluntary mediation last Wednesday during a meeting of the FUTURE Committee, composed of elected and appointed officials from all the local governments. Following two hours of heated discussion, the cities delivered a letter to commission Chairman Harold Bost, asking the county to answer their request for mediation by Dec. 1, but Peachtree City Mayor Bob Lenox admitted this week that may have been unreasonable. Bost wrote back to the cities saying he will respond to their request as soon as the commission has been able to discuss the matter, but would not say Monday whether the request will be discussed at the group's workshop today at 3:30 p.m. If commissioners don't discuss the request today, their next opportunity is next Thursday, Dec. 14, at 7 p.m. Lenox said he hopes they don't wait that long, because counties and cities throughout the state are facing a Dec. 31 deadline to resolve such issues under a state law requiring that counties and cities eliminate duplication of services and double taxation. "It's hard for me to imagine them not talking about it," said Lenox this week. "All three major cities are united in this. I would think they would want to talk about it and get back to us." If the group doesn't discuss the issue today, Lenox said city leaders probably will discuss whether to go to Superior Court and ask for mandatory mediation rather than waiting to see what the commission does Dec. 14. The cities' letter said mandatory mediation will be the next step if the county refuses voluntary mediation. "If we get to Jan. 1 and we haven't settled this, we are in deep doo-doo," Lenox told county leaders after reading the cities' letter during the FUTURE meeting. FUTURE (Fayette United Team to Use Resources Effectively) is a three-yearold committee of elected and appointed officials from the county and all the local cities, and is charged with finding ways the governments can cooperate, eliminate duplicate services and save taxpayers money. City leaders maintain that their residents are paying more in taxes to Fayette County than they are receiving in services, while county officials say there is no inequity. The controversy is complicated by House Bill 489, which requires counties and cities to resolve such issues and make sure that no residents are charged taxes for services they don't receive. Dec. 31 is the state-imposed deadline for the governments to find solutions. Failing that, the state could revoke their status as certified local governments. A consultant hired jointly by county and cities earlier this year declared that a tax inequity does, indeed, exist and city residents are shortchanged. But County Commission Chairman Bost has argued that the consultant's work didn't take into account the fact that city residents receive a larger property tax rollback from local option sales taxes than county residents do. That evens the scale, he said, and commissioners agreed, voting to make that their "final answer." Bost's contention "makes a lovely argument that is totally meaningless," Lenox said during the FUTURE meeting. The sales tax rollback has nothing to do with the governments' budgets and how much each resident is paying for county services, he said. "I don't care what the rollback is... that's all crap,' said Lenox. "What really matters is the actual amount of money that each homeowner has to pay. If you take $9.2 million from me [in property taxes] and give me $7.5 million in services, where is the equity?" But Bost said city residents receive a larger rollback in property taxes than county residents do, and that's money the cities can put in their budgets without charging the residents. "In this whole process, you get the $2.8 million and more back in credits," he said. "We are not going to resolve this sitting around the table," said Lenox. Mediation is the only recourse, he said. "We don't agree... what else can we do?" But mediation is not binding. What if mediation fails to resolve the matter? The law is not clear on the next step, said Lenox, adding a lawsuit may be the only way to bring finality. That lawsuit could possibly be filed by city taxpayers rather than by their governments, Lenox said.
|
||