Parks discussions were had regarding build-out plans for Wildcat (on Roberts) and Homecoming (on Vermack), with some council members wanting to put a bond on the November ballot. However, it was decided to maintain these parks as open fields just as they are and to install portable restrooms (better than porta potties) at each park. It was also decided that there will be no parks bond in 2024.
Everyone on Council (including me) agrees with building the trails in the Perimeter Center Business District as the PCID is matching funds and other monies are coming from our hotels. There is still disagreement on the construction of 10 to 12-foot wide paths in front of single-family homes, but the current Council (excluding me) has the will and votes to move forward on Winters Chapel and Mount Vernon.
In other park news, when the slides for park priorities failed to mention the turfing of the PCMS field with the track, I asked for an update. I was told DeKalb County School System didn't see it as a priority and was worried about equity to other schools in the district who don't have turf. As a reminder, the DCSS was bound to rebuild Austin Elementary School on its original site when the City proposed a a win / win solution to the County so that our families and children wouldn't be inconvenienced. In October 2016, we proposed a land swap for the Dunwoody Senior Baseball Fields; in order to make that happen, the City purchased the land where the ball fields sit from DCSS and executed a 25-year lease for nighttime use of the football field. The City later installed lights for night time use on the field, installed a facility storage building and would now like to turf that field in order to maximize usage. Without that turfing of the field, it is overused and almost unplayable without adequate care. The City of Dunwoody set aside 1 Million dollars in our 2024 budget with the hopes to pay for the turf installation but the required construction approval from DCSS has not been received. Unsure of all logistics, but maybe there will be some movement soon?
I have been very open regarding my concerns about the long term stability of City Finances and they will be a huge topic of conversation in the coming months because we are currently at our maximum millage rate and based on everything I am hearing, in 2026 our operating revenue will not be keeping up operating expenses. This is a separate conversation from dedicated Capital funds for stuff like parks and paving as we can not use those funds for operating costs.
Based on the intention of the city founders and charter, if taxes were to be increased over our current maximum millage limit, a referendum would be needed to remove the cap. We have operated under those constraints for the last 15 years, but financial pressures are building. We know there is possibly a technical workaround by placing the entire City into a special tax district for safety (Police, Ambulance, and maybe a supplemental charge to 911 costs over current phone taxes) to raise taxes for those services, but doing so without a resident vote is contrary to the founding plans of the City. If a referendum were to be held to raise operating funds and it were to fail, would we want to cut police services that are needed based on the growth and crime stats?
Right now, I anticipate a slowdown of some capital projects (Parks and Paths) in order to preserve high fund balances in the coming year so that we can attempt to get a good handle on finances from the spending side. These fund balances include both Capital and some Operational that we are saving for a rainy day or a golden opportunity should one arise. That being said, there are some capital projects and improvements to the police department going forward (again with one-time federal funds) because the safety our community is the primary goal of government.
Below are the documents from the retreat provided to council for discussion.
https://www.jkheneghan.com/city/meetings/2024/03/Retreat/02%20Parks.pptx
https://www.jkheneghan.com/city/meetings/2024/03/Retreat/05%20Police.pptx
https://www.jkheneghan.com/city/meetings/2024/03/Retreat/01b%20Sangster.pptx
2 comments:
John,
Thank you for providing source document links, analysis, and your well grounded thoughts on how to fund Dunwoody operational costs in the coming years. I wish our local press would help you out some by doing the same.
One observation is that we have a spending problem and NOT a revenue problem that REQUIRES eliminating the property tax freeze on residences. You are appreciated for standing up to those voices that are calling for a back door tax increase without a vote.
The penchant to build out the Winters Chapel multi-use 12' trail is a classic example of spending gone wild. This is an ugly, oversized monstrosity that does not connect anything to anything else. I spoke to the former Dunwoody City Manager who simply shook his head when I explained what and where this 12' trail would be built.
Citizens have spoken LOUDLY that the costly idea of unconnected 12' wide trail segments is not going to be supported. Just because Federal funds may be available to use doesn't mean that they should be squandered.
Continue to fight the good fight and know that you are being heard and more importantly, listened to by the majority, and not the loudest of citizens.
I know this is publicly available, but I ask this b/c you likely know this off the top of your head: what is Dunwoody's police budget as compared to Sandy Springs? This isn't a popular thing to say but: SSPD patrols about 9 miles of Roswell Road, with a wide variety of small businesses, apartments, etc. Dunwoody really has nothing comparable to this (we do have Ashford Dunwoody by the mall, a short stretch of P'tree Industrial). Dunwoody population is a bit less than half of SS, but our police budget probably *should* be no more than 25-30% of that of SS. Not a popular thing to say I realize. My 5 minute investigation indicates that our police budget is about 40% of SS (12.2M vs 29.7M).
Post a Comment