Blog Archives
Consolidation of Services Continues……..
The voters of Hawkinsville / Pulaski County voted down a proposal to consolidate the governments. One of the primary “selling points” to a consolidated government is lowering costs. These same lower costs can be obtained through consolidating SERVICES even though the governments themselves remain separate. The City and the County have done a great job at consolidating services throughout the years. E911, EMA, Recreation, Tax Collection, Fire, Police, Animal Control, Building and Code Enforcement and Economic Development are already consolidated.
Beginning July 1, 2015 we are adding ANOTHER to the list. The City is doing away with our Municipal court and turning over traffic fine collections to the county. With the retirement of City Clerk Evelyn Herrington as well as the retirement Lodie Johnson (who managed our municipal court), the time is right. By closing down our municipal court, the city will not have to fill Ms. Johnson’s position, thus saving the costs of that position. We will also not have to retain a municipal Judge. AND hours of work allocated to the City Clerk will not have to be performed. The county Probate Judge, Judge Jeff Jones, will begin hearing all traffic violations. Violations that are CITY ONLY, (such as dilapidated housing ordinance violations), will be heard by a Code Enforcement Board. We are recommissioning our current Zoning and Codes Board as a Code Enforcement board to hear the few CITY ONLY ordinance violations that are heard each year.
So…..
Consolidation as it relates to cost savings, continues. As it relates to SERVICES, continues to be an area that we (City and County) continue to explore. We don’t need a replication of efforts. We need to continue to find ways to work together to benefit ALL of our citizens. The taxpayers we all serve are the real winners when our governments work together.
Shelly
Share this:
Finally, a Meeting Worth Attending….
I have to attend many meetings. Most of them are a waste of time. I just attended a meeting of a group trying to form a DMA (Downtown Merchants Association). THIS meeting was great! The energy and the momentum were obvious.
The meeting was lead by our Archway Professional, Michelle Elliott . The group is trying to do whatever it can to rejuvenate our downtown area. They are looking at Window decorations in the abandoned buildings, cleaning up the streets, repainting and adding new murals to the downtown area, adding trash receptacles and also exploring options to help beef up the Hawkinsville River Market. Donna Rickerson, our new Hawkinsville Chamber executive Director was introduced and she had lots of great ideas.
While it is still early in the process, I am excited that 20+ people care enough to meet and discuss. The City of Hawkinsville was well represented by our city manager, Tim Young . ComSouth was there, local merchants were there, the Garden Club was there, the new owners of the Butterfly Mansion B&B were there, representatives from our DDA, and Rivers Alive were there as well as simply concerned citizens.
We have lots of work to do, but it is so encouraging when a group like this gets together, not to bash what is not happening, not to wish would should be happening, but to PLAN what CAN Happen.
Let’s all support those that are trying.
Share this:
Proud to Serve…….
I am very excited. I have been asked to serve on the GMA (Georgia Municipal Association) Board of Directors AND serve as Chairman of the Public Safety Policy Committee. One of the reasons that I ran for the City of Hawkinsville Commission was to be able to promote Hawkinsville. Promote its strong points to our own citizens AND promote it state wide. This position gives me another outlet to do just that!
GMA does an excellent job of lobbying the state lawmakers on behalf of ALL cities in Georgia. As Public Safety Committee Chair, I will be intimately involved in helping GMA dissect proposed legislation and how it effects Hawkinsville and other cities across Georgia. Too often, a law is passed without the full ramifications being understood. By diving into the details of a proposed law BEFORE it becomes law, we can hopefully get the author of the legislation to change its wording (or drop the bill entirely) if a negative effect on our cities would be the result. GMA has a great track record in their lobbying efforts. I am very excited about being able to help.
Thank you GMA for this honor!
Share this:
HB 170 as of 2/24/15
Well, it is changing again (and this is still in the House Version, we don’t have a clue what the Senate might do). BUT! I must say, the current version in the House is good for Hawkinsville. The School’s ESPLOST will now be unaffected! No losses for the school system in the current version. The only stipulation is that taxes that are received from Motor Fuels, MUST be spent in the area of Transportation, but the definition is pretty broad. The City and County’s SPLOST (and Future SPLOSTS) are unaffected, with only the same stipulation – Motor Fuel taxes must be spent on Transportation. The City and County’s LOST taxes will see an INCREASE in revenue. Although Motor Fuels are being removed, the rest of the sales tax base will be taxed at 1.25% rather than 1%, so it will be a NET gain to the combined CITY/COUNTY of almost $80,000.
Hotel/Motel Taxes are also being slightly adjusted upward in the current version. I don’t really understand why.
And as mentioned in an earlier post, the current version of this bill will also FORCE a larger state allocation of LMIG (road resurfacing money). Although we have to match (30%) of the LMIG allocation, this WILL allow us to resurface additional miles in the years to come.
So…. Although the fat lady has not even gotten up to sing yet, the current version IS good for Hawkinsville.
(I am NOT making any such overall statements about whether this bill is good for GEORGIANS or not. Any way you slice it, it IS a tax increase on gasoline purchases in Georgia).
Shelly
Share this:
HB 170 – Current Version is MUCH better for our community….
“The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change ” – Heraclitus
― That quote fits really well into the legislative process. HB 170 – the House version of the transportation bill, as introduced was very UNFRIENDLY to local governments. (Read my earlier post for full details). But city’s around the state complained to their respective representatives. Many cities and counties were passing resolutions asking their representatives to vote NO to House Bill 170. People were screaming, cussing, and complaining. But our representatives LISTENED to us, and the current version of this bill shows that.
As it stands now….
The House has made significant efforts to address the concerns expressed by local elected officials about the original bill’s impact on local revenues. HB 170 no longer includes language that would give a county governing sole authority to impose, or not impose, a 6¢ per gallon local excise tax. With the local excise tax option removed, so too is the local distribution formula based on DOT’s Local Maintenance & Improvement Grant (LMIG) program.
HB 170 as it passed the House Transportation Committee would do the following:
- beginning July 1, 2015, LOST, HOST and Atlanta’s MOST would no longer be collected on the sale of motor fuel;
- beginning July 1, 2015, the tax rate for LOST, HOST and MOST would be adjusted to 1.25% from the current 1% rate;
- current and future SPLOSTs and ESPLOSTs would continue to be imposed at a rate of 1%;
- current and future SPLOSTs and ESPLOSTs would continue to be collected on motor fuel except that diesel would no longer be taxed beginningJuly 1, 2015;
- for future SPLOSTs and EPLOSTS, any revenue collected from the sale of motor fuel would be required to be spent on transportation needs, which for cities and counties is defined broadly to include transit, rail and airports, and for schools includes the purchase of fuel and buses.
The House Transportation Committee version of HB 170 is a good faith attempt to make cities, counties and schools whole and to use current sales tax agreements for the distribution of revenue. While House leaders are looking for ways to reach the goal of making local governments whole in the aggregate, as with any significant change in what can be taxed as well as tax rates, some jurisdictions would see increases in tax revenue while others would experience a decrease.
In our community, the breakdown is as follows. (assuming future sales of motor fuels and other taxable products in our community remain somewhat stable with what 2014 saw).
LOST IMPACT:
City of Hawkinsville – Current = $421,455 Under HB170 = $444,800 (Net increase of $23,345)
County – Current =$421,455 Under HB170 = $444,800 (Net Increase of $23,345)
SPLOST IMPACT:
City of Hawkinsville – Current = $421,455 Under HB170 = $411,200 (Net decrease of $23,345)
County – Current =$421,455 Under HB170 = $411,200 (Net decrease of $23,345)
ESPLOST IMPACT
Pulaski County School System – Current = $842,911 Under HB170 = $822,400 (Net decrease of $20,510)
Total Community Impact is a net increase of revenue of a little over $5,600
Another benefit to us locally is that the GDOT is legally mandated to re-distribute at least 10% of its budget allocation for LOCAL improvements (know as LMIG – Local Maintenance and Improvement Grants. Last year the county received some $200,000 while the city received some $45,000 (to be matched 30%). Since the GDOT budget will rise SIGNIFICANTLY due to this HB170, our city and county should be receiving somewhere between a 50% and 100% increase in our LMIG allocations. This should result in many more miles of roads within our city that will be repaved during the 2016 fiscal year!
So, originally, the bill was BAD….. We complained as did others….. Our representatives listened and the current version of the bill is palatable.
Now lets wait and see what the Senate version of the bill looks like.
Shelly Berryhill
Hawkinsville City Commission
shelly@hawkinsvillega.net
Share this:
HB170 – Proposed Transportation Bill in the House
As of today (Valentine’s Day), HB170, the Transportation Bill is in the full transportation committee of the House. Basically, this bill is changing the current SALES tax on motor fuel (Gas & Diesel) to an excise tax. The advantage is that this will level out the fluctuating taxes raised by a sales tax which is dependent upon the price of gas which changes daily. By changing to an excise tax, which is charged PER GALLON rather than PER DOLLAR, it should level out the income received by the state. The trucking industry also receives larger tax benefits on an excise tax over a sales tax, so the trucking industry will see a huge benefit of this change. And we all want to help out industries in Georgia.
The State of Georgia is attempting to raise an additional $750 million + (annually) for the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT). However, THEY (our state elected officials) don’t want to “raise taxes.” So they are promoting this bill as a “revenue neutral” bill. Yeah, right! If they are bringing in an additional almost 1 BILLION dollars, it’s got to come from SOMEWHERE!
That somewhere apparently is going to be from your LOCAL governments (County, City, and School System). You see, our local governments currently receive 3 cents of every SALES TAX dollar raised. 1 cent goes to LOST (Local Option Sales Tax). 1 cent goes to SPLOST (Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax). And 1 cent goes to ESPLOST (Educational Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax).
When you remove MOTOR FUELS from these sales taxes, this 3 cents will disappear from the local coffers of your local governments. We will still receive LOST, SPLOST, and ESPLOST taxes, but not on Motor Fuel Sales. In Pulaski County, Motor Fuel sales account for almost 16% of the total sales taxes collected in Pulaski County. Therefore, your school system’s next ESPLOST will be reduced by almost 16% which will amount to a LOSS of income to the Pulaski County School system of approximately $131,410 per year. Constitutionally, the school system CAN receive sales taxes, but CANNOT receive excise taxes. And there are no plans by the state to supplement this loss. There are no plans by the state to help reduce expenses or other requirements. No, this will be a LOSS each and every year. ESPLOST is used for capital purchases (Buses, buildings, technology, etc.). Apparently, the state thinks the school can simply “absorb” this loss of income. No big deal. (yeah, right!).
The loss of the 1 cent on SPLOST will effect both the city and the county. Currently we have a negotiated agreement that we split SPLOST revenues 50/50. So this loss will effect each of us the same amount. SPLOST income currently amounts to about $842,911 per year. By removing Motor Fuels from the calculation, this number will reduce each year to $711,501. A loss of about $131,410 per year. This money is going away. So the county and the city will each face lower SPLOST revenue on the next SPLOST of almost $65,705 EACH! Like the school’s ESPLOST, SPLOST is used for capital expenditures like Road Equipment, Tractors, Recreation Department improvements, Sheriff Department Vehicles, etc. This loss of $131,409 per year amounts to a loss to the city and county of $788,460 on the next 6 year SPLOST! The tractors are STILL going to wear out. The deputies are STILL going to need vehicles. Water Meters are STILL going to go bad. Our option? We can only raise property taxes or fees to take care of the shortfall.
The loss of the 1 cents on LOST will also effect both the city and the county. Currently we have a negotiated agreement that we split LOST revenues 50/50. So this loss will effect each of us the same amount. LOST income ON MOTOR FUELS current amounts to about $393,690 per year. So this is ANOTHER $400K that the state is pulling away from local coffers.
BUT WAIT! NO WORRIES! The state is going to “come to our rescue.” They are going to “allow” the county to vote an additional 6 cents excise tax to be added to motor fuel in addition the the excise tax that the state is accessing. And to hear them talk, “that solves the problem.” But does it?
In Pulaski County, we sold 4,224,231 gallons of gas in fiscal year 2014. So the 6 cents would increase the COUNTY coffers by $253,454 each year. Now last time I used my calculator, $253,454 does not bring back the lose of $140K (in LOST dollars) and $131K (in SPLOST dollars) and $131K (in ESPLOST dollars). Nope, by my calculations when you combine the decreases in LOST, SPLOST, and ESPLOST, our citizens are being short changed by about $403,000 PER YEAR! And that is AFTER our sole commissioner implements the 6 cents excise tax. If he should choose NOT to implement this tax, then the citizens will lose some $650K per year. Thanks Legislators!
But wait! There’s more!
Even if our sole commissioner DOES implement the 6 cents of excise tax (taking the heat of a “tax increase” rather than the state taking that heat!), the STATE is telling us HOW he has to split it with the city. Previously, our LOST and SPLOST splits were NEGOTIATED LOCALLY. Now, they are giving us a formula based on road miles in the city/county and population in each. The result will be on both LOST AND SPLOST rather than splitting 50/50 as we have for years, the STATE is telling us the motor fuel excise tax will be split 73/27. The county will get 73% and the city will be reduced to 27%. OUCH!
SO…. Not only are they reducing our monies, but they are TELLING US how to split the reduced amount they plan on giving us!
Based on 2014 figures, and assuming the county DOES implement the 6 cents, then the COUNTY will still lose $78,000, the school system will lose $131,000, and the city will lose $194,000 PER YEAR! And this is AFTER the 6 cents excise tax which the county may or may not implement. “Revenue Neutral huh?”. The city will bear 48% of the reduction. The school system will bear 33% and the county 19%. To replace this money, the county could be forced to raise their millage by almost a half mill. The school system could be forced to raise their millage by almost half a mill. And the city (who is hit the hardest) could be faced with over a 2 mill increase. (and we haven’t raised the millage since 1987).
THERE’S EVEN MORE! With LOST, the revenues go into the general fund. Your elected leaders can spend this money how they see fit (and answer to their local constituents). With SPLOST and ESPLOST, while the money has to go to capital projects, your local officials decide (by voter referendum) the projects that our citizens need. But with the coming changes, all the money from the motor fuel EXCISE tax MUST be spend on Transportation. We will have no choice. The State again TELLING us how to spend our money!
Hope is not yet lost. The bill is still in committee. The final has not been seen. And then regardless of what the house comes up with, the State Senate will still have their input and revisions. So ultimately it might be better. It might be worse. No one knows at this point.
My fear is that the final version won’t be significantly different that I have presented. I encourage you to contact our local state representatives and tell them NOT to pass this bill in its current state. Do we need more transportation dollars in Georgia? Yes! Do we need to collect those dollars by pulling them from the local economy? No!
The alternatives are many. They can leave our local 3 cents sales tax on gas and go on about their merry way. Or they can convert the 3 cents to an excise tax but LET LOCAL ENTITIES decide how to spend and how to divide the money. They can simply ADD to the state’s portion of the excise tax and fund the transportation needs. But no, that would mean THEY would be seen as raising taxes rather than forcing us LOCALLY to raise taxes.
Representative Buddy Harden is Pulaski County’s legislature in the State House. Senator Ross Tolleson is our Senator. Please contact these gentlemen and tell them to fund the state needs from state coffers. Not by pulling money away from our local governments. Their contact information is below:
Buddy Harden
R-District 148
504-G Coverdell Legislative Office
Atlanta, Ga. 30334
404-656-0188
buddy.harden@house.ga.gov
Ross Tolleson
R-District 20
121-F State Capital
Atlanta, Ga. 30334
404-656-0081
ross.tolleson@senate.ga.gov
Please let me know your thoughts. Reply to this post or email me at shelly@hawkinsvillega.net
I look forward to hearing from you!
Shelly Berryhill
Hawkinsville City Commission
Share this:
Pot Holes and Paving……
I have had more than the normal phone calls lately over some bad roads in Hawkinsville. Almost all of the conversations start like this…
Citizen: “The city needs to come out and repave the road in front of my house. It’s in bad shape and me and my neighbors pay our taxes and deserve better roads.”
Let me just start out by saying, “They are right!”. However, it is not as easy as just sending out a crew.. For starters, the City of Hawkinsville does not have a paving machine or paving crew. Our guys can certainly fix a pothole or repair a road cut. But we don’t have the resources to actually pave or even resurface a road. In order to do that, we rely on the state Department of Transportation (GDOT). GDOT allocates so much money to us each year to use toward resurfacing. In 2014 that amount was $48,719.74. We are required to do a 30% match, so that means we have $63,336 allocated toward resurfacing in 2014. We then submit a list of roads (in priority order) that we feel need resurfacing. The top 15 list we submitted for 2014 was:
| Name | Start | End | Distance | Width | |
| 1 | Markel St. | Martin St. | Lakeview Rd. | 1753 | 20 |
| 2 | Hillcrest Ave. | McCormick Ave | end of street (Clark Dr) | 1409 | 20 |
| 3 | Jordan Drive | Sunnybrook Circle | Sunnybrook Circle | ||
| 4 | W. McDuffie St. | McCormick Ave. | Brookside | 682 | 22 |
| 5 | Ryan St. | Broad St. | Commerce St. | ||
| 6 | S. Union St. | Broad St. | Carruthers St. | 3646 | 20 |
| 7 | Kibbee | Turner St. | Jackson St. | 2447 | 25 |
| 8 | Second Street | Progress Ave. | Houston St. | 2535 | 37 |
| 9 | Liberty St | S. Florida Ave. | Warren St. | 2419 | 30 |
| 10 | Clark Dr. | Hillcrest Dr. | Kamellia Dr. | 1223 | 19 |
| 11 | Fairgrounds Rd. | S. Jackson St. | County Landing Rd. | 2100 | 17 |
| 12 | Wildwood Ave | Mansfield Dr. | Craftway Cir. | 2432 | 20 |
| 13 | Craftway Cir. | Wildwood Ave. | Thompson Way | 1314 | 20 |
| 14 | South Wood St. | Broad Street | Commerce Street | ||
| 15 | Pineywood Drive | Knotty Pine St. | end of street |
(This list is compiled from our street department as well as citizen complaints and then prioritized by the City Administration and the City Commissioners).
It costs us an estimated average of $0.56 per square foot to resurface (some more, some less depending on current road conditions and other factors). So once we find out how much money the state is going to allocate for us, then we have to re-prioritize our list to see that we get the most bang for our buck. We have to consider such questions as: Do we pave ONE long road, or several smaller roads, even if the long road is in worse condition? How many citizens actually live on that road? Is it a thoroughfare to other areas? Can we temporarily patch it and get by another year?
For 2014, we ending up having enough funds to do:
| 1 | Markel St. | Martin St. | Lakeview Rd. | 1753 | 20 |
| 2 | Hillcrest Ave. | McCormick Ave | end of street (Clark Dr) | 1409 | 20 |
| 3 | Jordan Drive | Sunnybrook Circle | Sunnybrook Circle | ||
| 4 | W. McDuffie St. | McCormick Ave. | Brookside | 682 | 22 |
It is estimated that it will cost the city (and GDOT) $66,000 to complete these projects.
In order to complete any additional roads, they would have to be paid for 100% by our local tax dollars. By waiting on each years GDOT allocation, we get much more for our local dollars (with the state contributing 70% of our cost). While we know there are other roads that need paving, we also have many other infrastructure needs to pay for as well. And on the other infrastructure needs, the state gives us no help. Thus the local taxpayers have to pay 100% of the other costs. So it makes more sense to only pave the roads each year that GDOT will help us with and put our other limited resources toward the other infrastructure needs. If we DON’T do at least the amount that GDOT approves, they will not pay ANY! So we need to at least do enough roads each year in order to get their 70% contribution. Anything OVER our total, we would have to pay 100% for.
I was sitting at McDonald’s the other day with one of the “coffee clubs” that meet there. They took the opportunity to tell me of all the needs in the city of Hawkinsville. For example, they want us to fix all the roads, replace all the old water and sewage lines, and invest heavily in industrial recruitment (among other things). But most importantly, don’t raise taxes. In other words, their request was to correct outstanding problems (aka spending money) while not raising taxes (aka increasing revenue). An impossibility. We operate under a TIGHT, LEAN budget. So in order to do any additional work each year (pave additional roads, replace additional pipes, etc.) would require MORE revenue (aka higher taxes).
So, I am writing this post to assure you, our citizens, that we are doing our very best to correctly, efficiently, and effectively allocate the limited resources that we have. Do we have bad roads? YES. Can we afford to simply repair/resurface them all now? NO. We simply take our list each year, (again, compiled from our street department and citizen complaints) and prioritize and fund based on the dollar amounts that GDOT allocates to Hawkinsville each year.
If you know of a bad street, let us know. Our crews have spent the last two weeks repairing MANY of the potholes around town, but I am positive there are more. Call City Hall (478-892-3240) or simply email City Hall (cityhall@hawkinsvillega.net) or you can even reply to this post. We will look at the road, add it to our list, and then consider it when we re-prioritize each year.
Pot holes and patches? YES, we can do those ourselves, so again, LET US KNOW. Sometimes, the worse the condition, the LESS people report it. I suppose they feel that “surely someone has told the city how bad this pothole is.” But if everyone is thinking someone else is reporting it… well,… sometimes NO ONE reports it. Also, not all roads are city maintained. Some are STATE roads, and some that get reported are actually COUNTY roads. But let us know and we will pass along the information to the appropriate agency or government.
Thoughts?
Share this:
Consolidation continues? Zoning Boards to merge
Well, the citizens decided against consolidating Hawkinsville and Pulaski County governments. However, that is not stopping the respective governments from continuing to work together to consolidate services whenever it makes sense. We are now working with County Commissioner M.A. “Butch” Hall to consolidate the zoning ordinances and zoning boards of Hawkinsville and Pulaski County.
We will utilize ONE set of zoning ordinances, ONE county wide zoning map, and ONE zoning board to hear zoning requests. This move will not only save a little money (we pay our zoning board members AND the county pays their zoning board members), but it will also make things more consistent and easier for our citizens. A citizen can get the maps, forms, ordinances, etc from EITHER government.
We will continue to look for ways to make our respective governments more responsive, better fiscal stewards, and better listeners to our citizens. If you have any input on this or any issue, please respond below. I look forward to your thoughts….
Share this:
Speed Bumps – A bumpy road indeed…
Personally, I hate speed bumps. They are aggravating and bad for the car. They cost money. I would much rather see law enforcement write tickets, thus CREATING revenue, than us spending money to place speed bumps.
Having said that, I do understand why a parent of small children would request one. As they see cars speeding down their road, they know that at that speed, reaction time would be limited. For the safety of their children and pets, they want cars to slow down. Speed bumps DO accomplish that.
During my tenure on City Council, I have voted against almost all speed bumps that have been presented to us. I have only voted affirmative for two. The first one was a request by First Baptist Church of Hawkinsville. They owned both sides of the street and children were often running to their parent’s vehicles after meeting times. This one made sense to me.
The second one was requested by a mother on a busy street. She had gotten almost all her neighbors to agree. So I voted for it.
One that I voted against was requested by a good friend of mine. He called and requested it right in front of his house. I told him of my disdain for them, but I also correctly informed him that if it was brought up, it would probably pass. He asked me to bring it up. So… I made the motion to place a speed bump in front of his house. The motion was seconded and then I voted against it. That got a few strange looks. Why would I make the motion and then vote against it? Simple: A citizen had a request and it was worthy of discussion and a vote. But even after bringing it up, my disdain for them remained so I voted against it. It passed 4 to 1.
Subsequently, we have had more drama with speed bumps. So in November of 2013, I made the following motion:
“Any time a citizen requests a speed bump, the city will place a radar detection unit on that street. This radar detection system will record the number and speed of all traffic on that street for a period of at least two weeks. This will allow us to see if there truly is a need. Does the traffic warrant it? Are cars speeding down the road? Then one of two things will take place. If the homeowner lives in a section that has a homeowner’s association, we will require that the homeowners association take a vote and submit that vote to us. If the homeowner does NOT live in a section that has a homeowner’s association, the city will poll every household that lives on that street from stop sign to stop sign and determine the neighborhood’s feel for having a speed bump placed on their street. All of the above information will then be presented at the next regularly scheduled city commission meeting, where a vote will be taken.”
The motion was passed. Hopefully this will place a little more accountability on the process.
What are your thoughts on speed bumps? Do they work? Are they worthwhile? What alternatives would you suggest? I represent the citizens of Hawkinsville, so knowing your thoughts on these issues will help me decide how to vote. While speed bumps are not the most important decisions that we make, they do effect our lives DAILY as we have to drive over them. They merit discussion. Tell me YOUR opinion!
Share this:
Consolidation: My 2 cents after the election…
Now that the election is over, let me share my thoughts on the consolidation issue here in Hawkinsville / Pulaski County. I really did not want to say much prior to the election. Whatever I said, (or say now probably) would have been construed by the pro-side as being against consolidation and would have been construed by the con-side as being for consolidation. As a sitting official, I really felt that I should remain neutral. I think the citizens of this county should have whatever form of government that they want – therefore, I voted to allow the citizens to vote in the Nov. 5th referendum to decide that question.
Ironically, now that the election is over, I am probably getting asked more about it than before the election.
First, let me clear up (or attempt to) the confusion about – “City people got to vote twice”. There were two completely separate elections taking place. The city residents had to decide if they were in favor or not in favor of consolidation. The county residents (which is everyone that lives in Pulaski including those within the city limits) also had to decide if they were in favor or not in favor. So if you live in the city, it was not exactly that you voted twice in one election, but you voted once each in two different elections. Whether you agree or disagree that is how the Secretary of State’s Office told us to do the election. The Secretary of State guy quoted as saying it was illegal was probably simply asked if it was legal to vote twice in an election. This is the same way the vote was done in 1999 as well. A good analogy is this: if COKE and PEPSI were going to merge, and you owned stock in BOTH (city AND county resident), then you would get to vote in the COKE election and the PEPSI election.
When this issue first came up of the consolidation, I was certainly not going to stand in the way, because again, I feel the citizens should have whatever form of government that they want. However, if we were going to go down that road, I wanted it done right. So we (city and county governments) appointed a 16 person study committee to look into this idea. We had young, we had old. We had white, we had black. We had men, we had women. We had business people, we had farmers. We had a great cross representation of people on this committee. We then provided them the resources necessary to fully explore this issue. The city/county accountant attended those meetings. The city attorney attended those meetings. City/County personnel attended those meetings. City/County officials attended those meetings when asked. We had the Regional Commission out of Macon facilitate the meetings. GMA (Georgia Municipal Association) and ACCG (Association of County Commissioners of Georgia) attended many of the meetings. The group was tasked with exploring the avenues, the good, the bad, the financial, the personnel, etc. etc of this issue and to report back to the governments if they would recommend we pursue a consolidated government or not. This group met for over a year. They finally concluded that the majority of the group felt that we SHOULD pursue the consolidation. So both the city and county governments then changed the group from a study committee to a charter commission. They were to formulate the recommended “look and feel” of the new proposed government that would govern the consolidated “Hawkinsville / Pulaski County’. They wrote the charter which defined things such as the number of commissioners, their terms, the rotation, the pay. They came up with the proposed districts, and all the other items that had to be addressed. The proposed charter was then sent back to the local governments, where they were deemed appropriate and the charter was then sent to the Georgia State Assembly for approval. After they approved, and the Governor signed it, it was then placed on the ballot for the November 5th election.
As with any issue there are pros and cons. As with many issues there are disagreements as to the assumptions made. The pro-side was proclaiming that the consolidation would save lots and lots of money. My personal belief is that it could have saved some money over time. Not a whole lot, but some. Economies of scale and increased efficiency were sure to happen. However, at the same time, the merger itself would have been expensive. Simply merging the two general ledgers and accounting systems would probably not have been cheap. Long term, we would be managing ONE accounting system rather than two, but short term, we have to create the system to do it. We have ALREADY functionally consolidated many departments with the County, so much of the savings of a consolidated government have ALREADY been realized. 911, EMA, FIRE, POLICE, ANIMAL CONTROL, TAX COLLECTIONS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, RECREATION DEPARTMENT, BUILDING AND CODES ENFORCEMENT have all been functionally consolidated with the county over the last 10+ years.
I think a positive would have been that we could project ourselves as larger. When a potential industrial prospect inquired as to the size of our city, we could report 12,000 rather than 4,000.
A positive would have been some reduced bureaucracy on items that previously would have had to obtain both city and county approval. However, for items requiring JUST county approval, you would have had to convince 3 of the 5 county commissioners rather than the current sole commissioner.
For many people that do not like that we have a SOLE county commissioner, a board of 5 was more appealing.
Some on the con-side were proclaiming that suddenly the county would have to conform to city ordinances or pay city taxes. That was not accurate. All ordinances applying NOW to the county would have remained to the county, while all ordinances applying just to city residences would have remained applying just to city residences. All city taxes collected would have remained in the city. The county was NOT suddenly going to have to pay city taxes. Their dirt roads were NOT going to suddenly be paved, and they were NOT going to suddenly have the option of utilizing city services such as water or trash pickup.
I think consolidation would have removed one barrier to city annexation. NOW, we must not only have the proposed properties’ owner’s approval, but we must also have approval from the county. I suppose since the consolidated board would have represented both city and county, the county approval would not have been necessary. Depending on how you feel about the possibility of annexation, this could be either a pro or a con for consolidation.
On the negative side, I like the fact that we are all (city and county officials) elected at-large. I like that I feel I get to represent ALL of the residents of Hawkinsville, and not just my little “district.”. I also like the fact that the way it is now, 100% of the people voting on city taxes are required to LIVE within the city and pay the taxes that they might propose. Under the consolidated government, it would have been possible for only some (or even none) of the elected officials to have to pay 100% of the taxes they were proposing (if they lived in the county, but were voting on taxes or fees for the city district).
There are many other valid arguments for or against the proposed consolidation. But the people have spoken. And we will continue as we were. I heard several residents proclaim that their reason for voting against consolidation was simply, “It ain’t broke, so it don’t need fixin'” There is some truth in that statement. Unlike many cities and counties across Georgia, our two governments work very well together. In fact, just this past Friday, Sole County Commissioner M.A. “Butch” Hall, myself, and Jerry Murkerson, the City Manager, were invited as guest panelists at a joint GMA/ACCG training session in Dublin, Ga. The training was on City/County Cooperation and we were presented as a MODEL for how to accomplish this.
I love that we live in a country where the PEOPLE get to decide. The PEOPLE are in charge. Not a few but all. I applaud those of you who VOTED in this election and I think I can speak for both the City and the County governments when I say, “We will strive to continue to work together to improve the lives of the citizens of this great community. We need more industry, we need more jobs. We need to continue to make sure that EVERYONE has a voice and that EVERYONE gets heard. We need to continue to find ways to keep costs (aka TAXES) down while providing the services that the government needs to provide.”
We have a great community. As with any group of individuals, there are differences of opinion. There are facts to any issues and there are incorrect facts about any issue. We will continue to work together, even when we disagree on some items, or some points. We all want what’s best for the community and our children. Finding the optimum route to get there is often a challenge and the route chosen is often debated. But the end-goal is hopefully the same.
I would love to have your feedback on this post or any post….
Shelly J. Berryhill
Hawkinsville City Commissioner
Shelly Berryhill 