Is a Bond Referendum the Right Choice for Johns Creek?

Would a bond referendum be the right fix for the city of Johns Creek? That depends on who you ask. Before the bond referendum can happen, the city council must approve such a measure. Johns Creek Mayor Mike Bodker said "the city council won't move the issue forward if they don't feel that's what the citizens want." Further, a strong case must be made to the citizens and business leaders in the community for the benefits of such a move since it would mean incurring debt.

I recently read coverage of the "Conversations with the Community" town hall meeting Bodker held on Dec. 16 at Perimeter Church, and was immediately struck by the mention of the "weakness" in the city's charter that requires approval from 50 percent of eligible voters to increase taxes. The inability to increase taxes would likely prevent the city from obtaining a good bond rating.

But changing the charter should not be that difficult. In a recent interview with the mayor, he said the charter "doesn't require residents to give permission to make changes" because it is enacted by the General Assembly of Georgia. He said "authors of legislation didn't intend to make it impossible to change language." "The charter was cut and pasted from many other charters and made into the Johns Creek charter," he added. The charter contained conflicting language and changes were made to resolve that.  The charter was also amended in the past to clean up a boundary issue, as well as changing the millage rate. It should be noted that every change to the charter has been approved unanimously. So, this issue with taxes is nothing new.

Johns Creek, like many cities across the United States, is feeling the pinch from the recession. Bodker expressed concern about the city's expenditures vs. revenues and said "the gap between the base amount to run the city and what we bring in is getting smaller due to the economic conditions." He made the case that bonding could be a good way to leverage the city's dollars and pay for projects, but the voters must make the decision to go forward if a bond referendum made it on the ballot.

For example, Bodker cited the conditions of roads in the city. He said it takes $3 million a year for five years to catch up on the necessary roadwork that needs to be done, including resurfacing. So far, the city has spent about $1.25 million a year for resurfacing, enough to cover about eight miles of roads, the mayor said. In essence, the city has lost ground and has gained very little as a result. If bonding was in place, the city could do so much more and expeditiously than having to use only the money on hand or raised through possible service cuts. The reality is, the longer you wait to address the issues and maintain the roads, the more money it will cost in the long run. For each year that passes before a road is resurfaced, the more expensive it becomes.

Johns Creek is a young city and there must be changes to straighten out the kinks. The reality is that the city and city council must work with the residents to prioritize what needs to be done. To echo Bodker, residents want to have the comfort of knowing if they call for a fire truck, one will come or that residents will have recreation and parks for their children. The tough decisions must be made and the city must increase its revenue, whether through service cuts, bonding or an increase in taxes, which Bodker and the city council are against. The goal is not to keep losing ground, but to be able to catch up on all that needs to be done in a timely manner.

Bodker used the analogy of a homeowner doing his or her very best to maintain their home because allowing it to fall in disrepair and decay isn't the right way to go. Well, the same holds true for Johns Creek. It has to be put back together and advance beyond the growing pains.

No matter how you view the bond issue or an increase in taxes, something drastic has to be done, fast, to bridge the gap between the city's expenditures and its revenues. Tough choices have to be made, much in the same way as many residents who have taken a cue from the European countries of Greece, Spain and Portugal in implementing austerity measures in their own households. You can't allow the infrastructure to crumble or not be maintained and expect business as usual.

As Bodker rightly stated, it will cost far more in the long run. Though nobody likes to incur debt, it might be in the city's best interest to take a long, hard look at bringing a bond referendum to the ballot. The benefits far outweigh the risks.