Columbus, Georgia
Georgia's First Consolidated Government
Post Office Box 1340
Columbus, Georgia, 31902-1340
(706) 653-4013
fax (706) 653-4016
Council Members
Minutes
Budget Review Committee
May 21, 2002
Present: Chairperson Evelyn Turner Pugh, Mayor Pro Tem John J. Rodgers and
Councilors R. Gary Allen, Berry Henderson, Julius Hunter, Jr., Robert
Poydasheff, Richard Smith (arrived at 4:20 p.m.), Nathan Suber and Evelyn
Woodson. Mayor Bobby G. Peters, City Manager Carmen Cavezza, City Attorney
Clifton Fay, Finance Director Kay Love and Financial Planning Division Manager
Angela Cole.
Absent: Councilor Charles E. McDaniel, Jr. was absent.
Guest: Mr. Jim Yancey, Mr. Jim Buntin and Mr. Steve Butler from the
Development Authority.
Call To Order:
Chairperson Evelyn Turner Pugh called the meeting to order at 4:13 p.m. in the
Conference Room, Ground Level of the Government Center, Columbus, Georgia.
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY:
City Manager Cavezza said that we asked the members of the Development
Authority to be present to talk about the economic development piece. He
explained that right now, we have $400,000. in the general fund for economic
development, but we have a request listed on the add/delete list to reduce that
amount to $250,000. He said that the discussion at the last meeting was that
the committee members wanted to know what that money would be used for.
Mr. Jim Yancey, representing the Development Authority came forward to
emphasize that there has never been a better time to invest in economic
development then right now. He said that what we have in the way of resources
is not going to allow us to compete effectively in the future as we have been
doing in the past. He said that our prospect list is not nearly as long as it
has been in the last five years. He suggested that the committee put into the
budget a portion of a mill that could be directed to the Development
Authority of Columbus that could be used for economic development. He
explained that their intentions are to come back with a definitive budget; so,
the committee would know what we would spend that money for, but we are not
prepared for that today. He requested assistance in the form of an annual
amount of money that could be funneled into the Development Authority to be
used strictly for economic development purposes. He advised that this funding
would give us an opportunity for better planning and utilization for the
resources that we have in the form of human resources, if the Development
Authority could receive this kind of support from the committee members.
Mr. James Buntin, Former Chairman of the Development Authority, came forward to
first express his appreciation for the support that the Council has given the
Development Authority. He maintained that the City needs a systematic way of
funding the Development Authority which gives us something to plan with. He
then called attention to a document titled ?Total Tax Digest 1988 ? Present?
and made several references to the document. (A copy was filed for the
record.)
-------------------------------------------*** ***
***------------------------------------------
NOTE: Councilor Smith arrived at this point of the meeting with the time being
approximately 4:20 p.m.
-------------------------------------------*** ***
***------------------------------------------
Mr. Stephen Butler, representing the Development Authority, was present to make
additional comments regarding the funding for economic development. He also
informed the committee members that the Development Authority would be holding
a meeting this week and would like to have the opportunity to come back and
give the committee some details about how we think this money should be spent
and what the needs are of the Authority.
Councilor Suber said that it was his understanding that we were only giving the
Development Authority $100,000. to $150,000., but the printout shows $185,000.,
at which time, City Manager Cavezza said that $185,000. goes to the Valley
Partnership; this is something that we give every year. He explained that last
year we gave $100,000. for economic development and $185,000. for the Valley
Partnership. He pointed out that they are two separate entities.
There was continued discussion on this matter with various committee members
expressing their views. As a result, the following item was placed on the
add/delete list:
- .25 mills for economic development (Request of Councilor Smith)
Councilor Allen recalled that we had talked about not tying the amount to a
mill per se and using the .25 millage or whatever that amount turns out to be
to calculate the amount, but not tie it to a millage amount. He pointed out
that it is not going to be one mill every year, because we all know that the
one mill goes up every year and would cost us more. He suggested that if we
all agree on a .25 of a mill; then, whatever amount that turns out to be in
dollars we could revisit this matter each year to reaffirm that amount which
the Development Authority would be receiving at least that dollar amount each
year. The following item was also placed on the add/delete list.
- .125 mills for economic development (Request of Councilor
Poydasheff)
Mayor Peters briefly explained the reason that he chose to take the $400,000.
for economic development from the fund balance. Finance Director Love
explained that if we can equate dollars to a millage rate for anything outside
of the general fund; then, we must levy a millage rate in order to get the
digest approved when we take it to the Department of Revenue. She pointed out
that it would equate to a dollar amount, but we would be levying a millage
rate. She said that if the Council chooses to address it the next year and if
the millage improves and the Council wanted to keep it at the remaining amount;
then, the Council would be rolling back that millage rate for a lesser amount
to come up with the dollar amount that the Council wants to appropriate.
When asked by Councilor Henderson about what would be different next year
regarding employees? raises or what are we doing this year that would position
us next year to provide pay raises, Finance Director Love acknowledged that we
would be in a worse state next year due to bringing on the new employees for
the jail that we have to recognize. Mayor Peters agrees that next year there
should be a millage, but not this coming fiscal year.
*** *** ***
At this time, City Manager Cavezza provided an overview of topics for
discussion at the next Budget Review Committee Meeting.
*** *** ***
Mr. Jim Yancey, in his closing remarks, stated that he equates our economic
renaissance to the creation of the Consolidated City/County government, because
it is us together working as a team.
There was some additional discussion on the millage, at which tine, Mayor Pro
Tem Rodgers said that he is talking about putting the millage off by itself.
He said if we start
with the first component as that $400,000., which is not a part of the general
fund balance; then, do we have to levy 16.38 mills? Finance Director Love
replied to get the $400,000. yes, because that is coming from fund balance;
therefore, if you want to start with that $400,000. it has to equate to
something, because it comes from the general fund, but if you are going to have
a separate millage rate; then, that?s outside the general fund. She added that
if you don?t do the $400,000. out of general fund, that amount goes back into
the fund balance.
There were continued discussions with Finance Director Love responding to
various scenarios that were suggested by the members of the committee.
Councilor Suber asked Mr. Jim Yancey if he was going to bring back to the
committee next week a projected budget for the $400,000., at which time, Mr.
Yancey agreed to do so. Councilor Suber also asked that he bring back a
projection for a lesser amount of approximately $250,000.
-------------------------------------------*** ***
***------------------------------------------
There being no further budget items for discussion, this meeting adjourned at
5:10 p.m.
Sandra T. Davis
Deputy Clerk of Council
Council of Columbus, Georgia