Johns Creek City Council Work Session - August 11, 2025: FY2026 Budget Debate and Strategic Priorities

On August 11, 2025, the Johns Creek City Council held a work session at 11360 Lakefield Drive. The meeting focused primarily on the FY2026 budget, including revenue projections, growth assumptions, capital projects, and staff compensation. Discussions were marked by disagreements over revenue forecasting methodology and transparency, with several agenda items deferred to the next work session.

Consent Calendar

• No consent calendar items were presented for unanimous approval; the routine business item (Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract) was listed but not discussed.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public comments were made during this session.

Discussion Items

• FY2026 Budget Discussion (90-minute agenda item, extended to over two hours)

  • Growth Assumption (Property Tax Digest Growth): Council debated whether to increase the assumed property tax digest growth from the conservative $70 million (used historically) to $200 million, as recommended by staff based on a five-year average of $243 million. Councilmember Tunki proposed using the additional $440,000 in projected revenue to fund a 2.1% to 2.7% COLA adjustment ($153,000) and either Newton Park tennis/pickleball court lining ($300,000) or an adventure play area ($300,000). Councilmember Bob strongly opposed the $200 million growth figure, arguing it was overly optimistic and that the city has consistently operated with surpluses using the $70 million assumption. He noted that the five-year average was skewed by high growth in 2022 and 2023. Councilmember Chris supported $200 million, citing it as a conservative number relative to historical trends and a way to reduce large surpluses. Councilmember Stacey questioned the jump from $70 million to $200 million, preferring a more conservative approach. Councilmember Larry expressed support for a probabilistic method using standard deviations. A consensus emerged to request additional data from staff, including a model separating pre- and post-COVID trends.
  • COLA Adjustment: There was broad agreement to fund the CPI-U-based cost-of-living adjustment from 2.1% to 2.7%, consistent with the June 2025 CPI-U figure. Staff indicated a future policy amendment to align the reference month with the budget cycle.
  • LOST (Local Option Sales Tax) Revenue Projection: Staff projected $30 million for FY2026, based on current year trends. Councilmember Bob challenged this as aggressive, noting that the previous finance director had projected $28 million. Assistant City Manager Kay Love defended the $30 million figure as not the most conservative but based on actual data and multiple scenarios (ranging from $28.2 million to $30.6 million). Councilmember Chris and Mayor felt comfortable with $30 million, while Councilmember Stacey was indifferent pending more data. No final consensus was reached.
  • Building Permit Double Counting: Staff disclosed a potential $1.5 million overcount in the building residential and plan review line items, which may require downward adjustment in the proposed budget.
  • Surplus Allocation: The FY2025 projected surplus of approximately $2.9 million (to be added to unassigned fund balance) was discussed as a potential source to advance-fund FY2026 projects. Staff will provide updated figures by August 15, 2025.
  • Chamber of Commerce Funding: Councilmember Stacey proposed reallocating $25,000 from the Greater North Fulton Chamber regional program to the Johns Creek Chamber of Commerce, and increasing Leadership Johns Creek funding for three staff slots ($7,500). Other councilmembers requested more details on the regional program’s benefits and the Johns Creek Chamber’s proposal.
  • Unfunded Needs and Transparency: Councilmember Stacey presented slides showing unfunded requests from departments, including a fire transport vehicle ($500,000), lifesaving equipment ($106,000), police pay adjustment (3.4%), and compensation adjustments. She argued that the budget document did not include all departmental needs, accusing staff of filtering information. City Manager explained that the budget process involves a thorough prioritization by department heads, with many requests withdrawn after collective discussions and alignment with council priorities. Mayor and several councilmembers defended staff, asserting that the process is transparent and that Stacey’s claims were unfounded.

• Multi-Modal Policy and Matrix (30-minute agenda item)

  • The item was deferred to the next work session due to time constraints.

• Cauley Creek Parking Lot (15-minute agenda item)

  • Also deferred to the next meeting.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken; consensus was reached on the COLA adjustment (2.7%) using part of the projected $440,000 additional revenue, pending final revenue numbers.
• Staff will provide updated budget documents incorporating council feedback (including growth assumption analysis, capital project prioritization, and unfunded needs list) for the August 25 work session.
• The FY2026 budget adoption is scheduled for September 8, 2025.
• The Multi-Modal Policy and Matrix and Cauley Creek Parking Lot items were deferred to the August 25 work session.
• The council directed staff to research franchise fee audits and street light LED conversion opportunities.
• Tensions over transparency and the budget process were left unresolved; further discussion is expected at subsequent meetings.