Georgia County Government - December 2008 - (Page 13)

OUTLOOK continued from page 11 Tomorrow’s Transportation Today” (IT3) Strategic Transportation Plan in November (www.it3.ga.gov). Leadership within the General Assembly have also committed to revisiting legislation that would enable a regional T-SPLOST for local governments. The question of solving Georgia’s transportation crisis remains important to local governments, the private sector and the state, and counties can expect to see much debate in 2009 over transportation funding legislation and other transportation issues, with legislative measures anticipated. Revenue and Finance Local sales tax collections will figure prominently in the coming legislative session, according to ACCG Legislative Director Clint Mueller, who coordinates the Revenue and Finance policy committee. “Counties support maximizing sales tax revenues to help lower property tax rates. However, a lack of compliance in sales tax collections and payments penalizes businesses that are following the rules and taxpayers who make up the revenue shortfall through higher tax rates,” Mueller explains. “Meanwhile, the Georgia Department of Revenue (DOR) lacks resources to enforce compliance, and the low ratio of audits to accounts has sometimes led to the perception that it is easy to avoid or misreport collections in Georgia without fear of penalty.” Mueller continues, “local governments receive very little information about their sales tax collections from the Department of Revenue and have almost no ability to assist the state with collection compliance. Other states have had success allowing local governments an option to collect their own taxes, finding that this creates more competition in the marketplace and has forced their state revenue department to improve its service to local governments.” During the coming session, ACCG is asking the General Assembly to give counties three alternatives for collecting local sales taxes allowing them to collect and audit their sales taxes using county staff, a third party provider or contracting with the DOR. Fee revenue enforcement is another legislative concern under Revenue and Finance in the coming session, Mueller reports. As interest in moving away from, or at least placing less reliance on, property taxes to support local government services, continues, several counties have expressed interest in replacing a portion of property tax revenues with fee-based revenues. “The rationale for this is that the fees are more proportional to the services being consumed and that the payer base is broader,” Mueller points out, “ensuring that everyone is contributing and that no one individual takes on an unreasonable level of burden for supporting the service.” Some counties have already attempted to charge these fees to support storm water infrastructure and maintenance, fire service, and other public safety services. Although they can legally charge the fee, they have not always been successful in collecting the fee owing to a lack of enforcement options, with delinquency expensive for counties to address in court. “To make fees a viable option, state law must grant local governments an easy-to-administer enforcement tool. Some measures used to collect property taxes have been very effective and would be very effective for collecting fees,” Mueller adds. “ACCG’s goal is to find an efficient way to enforce fee payment compliance to make fees a viable alternative to property taxes, and would support any enforcement measure that is effective.” Outdated fee-for-service charges by county constitutional officers may see legislative action in the coming session. County constitutional officers are authorized by state law to charge fees for various mandated services. Many fees have not been updated and have fallen far behind the actual cost to counties for providing services. When fees fail to cover the cost of providing services, they must be subsidized through the county’s general tax revenues. ACCG, therefore, is asking the General Assembly to update these fees to reflect the true cost of providing services, so the general public will not have to subsidize services provided to a limited number of users. Unprocessable sales tax funds are also likely to be addressed by the legislature, Mueller notes, with ACCG asking for legislation lifting the sunset provision on a law that authorized the state to return “unidentifiable” tax OUTLOOK continued on page 14 DECEMBER 2008 www.accg.org 13 http://www.it3.ga.gov http://www.accg.org

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Georgia County Government - December 2008

Georgia County Government - December 2008 Contents President's Message County Matters 2009 Legislative Forecast: ACCG's Platform for the Coming Legislative Session ACCG Policy Staff 2008 Legislative Awards Honor Georgia Lawmakers Cell Towers and Local Governments Oglethorpe Power Plans Biomass Electric Facilities Georgia's Grand Old Courthouses: Dawson County Extension News: Biofuels Development Research Corner: Implementing a Record Retention Policy County Parade Index of Advertisers/Advertiser.com

Georgia County Government - December 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.