|
George
I have tried to explain the tax rate debate on Charlottesville Tomorrow's
blog and your readers might benefit from that analysis:
Here is a post with my "user
guide to the tax rate debate."
Those concerned about elected officials' statements and newspaper headlines
trumpeting "tax decreases," would prefer to see the real estate
tax issue presented clearly such that if the rate stays the same or only
drops a little, it is made clear the tax burden is still increasing for
the public. I think that's a fair critique. Of course, we can't control
the headlines, but I can control my reporting of this issue. So, f or example,
note in this post how I describe the City's proposed tax rate:
"City Manager Gary O'Connell is recommending
to City Council a rate of $0.99 per $100 of assessed value, an effective
increase of 11.5 cents... "
In this case, even though the rate is the same in the City, because of rising
assessments, taxes are going up, and those there is an effective hike in
the tax rate.
Some are suggesting the official tax rate suddenly drops automatically since
the assessments were reported. More accurately I think, we should say local
government has to advertise a "lowered tax rate" that would offset
the assessment increases and that, unless they hold a public hearing to
set a new rate (which they always do), it will become the lowered rate in
the next fiscal year's budget. We also need to remind folks that the tax
rate is based on the calendar year and not the fiscal year. If the rate
in Albemarle County is raised or lowered in April, it will be retroactive
to January 1st. That presents windfall or refund issues for local government
budget staff to keep track of as the Board of Supervisors approves a balanced
budget as required by law. The windfall was not identified as an issue in
2000 (last time Albemarle raised the tax rate) and it was a public relations
mess for the Board.
Brian Wheeler (electronic mail, March 9, 2007)
|