Royston Sets Three Rollback Tax Rates, Leaving Billing Details Unclear

Royston City Council voted 6-0 on Nov. 10, 2025, to adopt rollback millage rates for the city portion of 2025 property taxes in Madison, Hart and Franklin counties. The rates approved for FY 2026 were 7.884 mills in Madison County, 8.070 mills in Hart County and 7.907 mills in Franklin County; the meeting minutes characterize the rollback as carrying no tax increase.

The decision matters to property owners inside Royston because the millage rate is a central part of calculating the city-tax portion of a bill. Royston’s boundaries extend into three counties, so council set a separate city rate for each county portion rather than a single rate for all city property.

The Nov. 10 action is the documented decision point in the record: Councilman Fields moved to accept the rollback rates, Councilman Hodges seconded the motion, and the council approved it unanimously. The resolution set the rates used for 2025 property taxes while placing them in the city’s FY 2026 budget cycle.

For residents and other owners of taxable city property, the practical concern is what the adopted rate means for the city charge on a particular bill. Council’s recorded position was that the rollback involved no tax increase. The minutes do not include a competing public position, testimony or an estimate showing how the action would affect particular parcels or households.

The rate adoption itself is complete: 7.884 mills for Madison County, 8.070 for Hart County and 7.907 for Franklin County were approved in the 6-0 vote. But the minutes do not establish when the rates took effect, whether they were later certified for billing, or how exemptions and assessed values would affect any owner’s final city-tax bill. The description of no tax increase should therefore not be read as an individual bill estimate.

The next public step will be a city tax-billing or millage-rate certification record showing how Royston put the approved rates into use. Until such a record appears, residents still cannot determine from the council minutes alone the billing schedule, whether administrative action followed, or the precise effect of the rollback on individual properties in each of the three counties.