The vision thing
Goochland supervisors voted unanimously to accept revised proffers for Manakin Towne Center at a special meeting on April 14. The proffers, changed after the April 7 public hearing, include a written commitment on the part of developer Scott Gaeser to donate easements needed for the widening of Broad Street Road.
The Board also unanimously approved a resolution asking the state to keep the Oilville rest areas for Interstate 64 open.
Our supervisors are so busy fighting the last war that they are usually caught flatfooted in the harsh light of day as each failure to plan bears its perilous fruit.
The brinksmanship with Gaeser could have been prevented by creation of a master plan for the Centerville Village. Discussed in vague terms by the board for at least five years and listed as a high priority action item in the newly approved Comprehensive Land Use Plan, a detailed vision for Centerville is still a pipe dream. Without a plan, each parcel is planned and developed with little regard for the whole. It is the county’s job to look at the big picture.
Given its queasiness about the economy, the board will reject measures to fund creation of such a plan. Yet, the board, with one different member, spent about $250,000 in 2007 planning a central garage that was scrapped before it left the drawing board. School bus maintenance people still work out in the weather on vehicles too large to fit into existing buildings.
District 5 supervisor Jim Eads regularly advocates inclusion of a referendum on the November ballot to gauge voter support for the county incurring debt, by issuing bonds, to pay for parks and other recreational facilities.
Eads seems to believe that the measure will fail at the ballot box and its defeat will silence the persistent drumbeat for more playing fields.
He also wants referendum support to build a new elementary school. The supervisors regularly point to a drastic falloff in building permits as evidence that the student population is stable and the school is not needed.
The number strollers and pregnant ladies around the county seems to indicate that the children to fill the seats in the unbuilt classrooms will come from homes already built and occupied.
A never-ending duel between the supervisors and the school board expended a lot of money on absurd plans to renovate and expand the existing Goochland Elementary School.
In addition to a genuine need for a new elementary school, county government will need more space as the county both grows and becomes more sophisticated. Given its location adjoining the administration building, the current GES is ideal for county expansion.
Because a school referendum must be requested by the school board, it is unlikely to happen.
At the request of the board, the schools presented a long- term building need program, about two years ago, which the board seems to have dismissed as unrealistic and ignores.
A long-term plan for school construction and a supporting funding strategy should have been in place ten years ago.
Instead, a cash proffer policy was tacked onto residential rezoning that was supposed to offset the cost of new schools.
At $8,375 per new house, more than 2,700 new homes would have to be built to recoup the approximately $24 million cost of a proposed elementary school. If that many new houses go up, Goochland will new a lot more than one elementary school. Currently, there are about 8,300 homes in the county.
Because the school system costs consume all of the revenue that the county realizes from property taxes, it is the most blatant illustration of the consequences reactive rather than proactive policies.
The prevailing philosophy on residential rezoning artificially inflates the cost of new homes in the county, transforming Goochland into an enclave for the affluent. That’s a great way to ensure the death of community.
People who can afford houses that cost $500,000 and up are far less likely to send their children to public schools; become fire-rescue volunteers; coach sports teams or join local organizations.
These associations and activities that nurture community and bind us together will wither for lack of new blood and eventually disappear leaving an anonymous community of upscale folk passing through between the boardroom and the cemetery.
Glimmers of an attitudinal paradigm shift by the supervisors peek out every so often. Their recent purchase of 36 acres of riverfront property near the Maidens bridge for development into a county park is one such indication.
Support for economic development at the Oilville interchange is another.
We can only hope that the incoming county administrator will make the board to focus on the county’s future and think long term in their decisions.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
High School Musical
Special meeting on Tuesday, April 14 at 7 p.m.
More supervisor shenanigans threaten to derail the widening of Broad Street Road through Centerville. This could throw even more cold water on commercial development in the county and push property tax rates through the roof. If the two cent tax hike that the board declined to enact last week gave you heartburn, prepare to buy antacids by the carload when the county struggles to service the debt on the Tuckahoe Creek Service District.
Should a change to annual reassessment be approved, which will likely result in lower property values that mirror the current real estate market, the board could be forced to raise property tax rates next year just to pay for level funding of county services.
During a public hearing on April 7, the supervisors voted 3-2 (Eads, Quarles and Pryor versus Butler and Creasey) to deny a change of proffers for the parcels of land on the northeast quadrant of the Broad Street/ Manakin Road intersection generally known as Manakin Towne Center.
Developer Scott Gaeser petitioned to relocate the main entrance to the project, whose only current structure is the Bank of Goochland, about 50 feet to the east. The eventual vision is to have a single access point for all of the parcels there, which would then be served by an internal road system. The proposed entrance would be further away from the Manakin and Broad intersection.
The proposed entrance would line up with the entrance to the project on the south side of Broad Street Road, which was rezoned about two years ago. This is expected to include retail and age-restricted housing. Having both entrances aligned would permit an opening in the median expected to be part of the four laning of Broad Street Road. This would ease traffic flow on both sides of the road.
In spite of extensive testimony in support of the change from VDOT engineers, county staff and local residents, the majority of board members decided that they knew more about traffic safety and road design.
Following the vote, Gaeser, who has developed several residential and commercial projects in the eastern end of the county, told the supervisors that he no longer intends to donate rights of way for the Broad Street Road widening project, which he valued at more that $1 million.
A VDOT employee said that without donation of those rights of way, the project essentially was dead and would not be considered until at least 2020. Given the dire funding projections from VDOT, that might have been an optimistic forecast.
A board meeting will be held at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, April 14 at the county administration building at 1800 Sandy Hook Road to reconsider the matter.
For all of the lip service that the board pays to unintended consequences, this vote shows that they care far more about petty intraboard power plays than the future of Goochland. The vote against the proffer change is believed to have been more of a way to “punish” District 4 supervisor Rudy Butler who has chided Eads about his lack of support for economic development. Butler has worked for years on the widening of Broad Street Road, which is in his district. Remember cliques in high school? This is the same kind of personal dynamic, all about who is in charge.
In addition to moving traffic more smoothly through Centerville, VDOT regulations pertaining to four lane roads have lower warrant thresholds for traffic signals. This means that a needed traffic signal at the intersection of Hockett and Broad Street Roads will be closer to reality. Coincidently, when Gaeser rezoned land on the east side of Hockett Road a while back, he was forced to proffer about $250,000 toward the cost of that installation.
Given the supervisors’ penchant for changing development rules in midstream, it is not surprising that money and interest in creating commercial projects, that would put sales tax dollars into county coffers goes elsewhere.
The supervisors need to get serious about becoming a catalyst for development or Broad Street Road though Centerville will continue to be the route used by Goochlanders as they take their sales tax dollars to Short Pump.
Come to the meeting and see the show.
More supervisor shenanigans threaten to derail the widening of Broad Street Road through Centerville. This could throw even more cold water on commercial development in the county and push property tax rates through the roof. If the two cent tax hike that the board declined to enact last week gave you heartburn, prepare to buy antacids by the carload when the county struggles to service the debt on the Tuckahoe Creek Service District.
Should a change to annual reassessment be approved, which will likely result in lower property values that mirror the current real estate market, the board could be forced to raise property tax rates next year just to pay for level funding of county services.
During a public hearing on April 7, the supervisors voted 3-2 (Eads, Quarles and Pryor versus Butler and Creasey) to deny a change of proffers for the parcels of land on the northeast quadrant of the Broad Street/ Manakin Road intersection generally known as Manakin Towne Center.
Developer Scott Gaeser petitioned to relocate the main entrance to the project, whose only current structure is the Bank of Goochland, about 50 feet to the east. The eventual vision is to have a single access point for all of the parcels there, which would then be served by an internal road system. The proposed entrance would be further away from the Manakin and Broad intersection.
The proposed entrance would line up with the entrance to the project on the south side of Broad Street Road, which was rezoned about two years ago. This is expected to include retail and age-restricted housing. Having both entrances aligned would permit an opening in the median expected to be part of the four laning of Broad Street Road. This would ease traffic flow on both sides of the road.
In spite of extensive testimony in support of the change from VDOT engineers, county staff and local residents, the majority of board members decided that they knew more about traffic safety and road design.
Following the vote, Gaeser, who has developed several residential and commercial projects in the eastern end of the county, told the supervisors that he no longer intends to donate rights of way for the Broad Street Road widening project, which he valued at more that $1 million.
A VDOT employee said that without donation of those rights of way, the project essentially was dead and would not be considered until at least 2020. Given the dire funding projections from VDOT, that might have been an optimistic forecast.
A board meeting will be held at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, April 14 at the county administration building at 1800 Sandy Hook Road to reconsider the matter.
For all of the lip service that the board pays to unintended consequences, this vote shows that they care far more about petty intraboard power plays than the future of Goochland. The vote against the proffer change is believed to have been more of a way to “punish” District 4 supervisor Rudy Butler who has chided Eads about his lack of support for economic development. Butler has worked for years on the widening of Broad Street Road, which is in his district. Remember cliques in high school? This is the same kind of personal dynamic, all about who is in charge.
In addition to moving traffic more smoothly through Centerville, VDOT regulations pertaining to four lane roads have lower warrant thresholds for traffic signals. This means that a needed traffic signal at the intersection of Hockett and Broad Street Roads will be closer to reality. Coincidently, when Gaeser rezoned land on the east side of Hockett Road a while back, he was forced to proffer about $250,000 toward the cost of that installation.
Given the supervisors’ penchant for changing development rules in midstream, it is not surprising that money and interest in creating commercial projects, that would put sales tax dollars into county coffers goes elsewhere.
The supervisors need to get serious about becoming a catalyst for development or Broad Street Road though Centerville will continue to be the route used by Goochlanders as they take their sales tax dollars to Short Pump.
Come to the meeting and see the show.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Fiscal sanity prevails
Supervisors hold the tax rate at 53 cents
During a somewhat difficult to follow public discussion at their workshop this morning, the Goochland board of supervisors decided to hold the real estate tax rate steady at 53 cents per $100 of assessed valuation.
In their afternoon session, the board approved a budget for fiscal 09-10, which begins on July 1, of $57,089,163 and a tax rate if 53 cents. The ad valorem tax on property in the Tuckahoe Creek Service District will also hold fast at 23 cents, which is levied in addition to the property tax.
The budget amount was reduced by the cost of funding projects in the county’s capital improvement plan. The board approved the CIP items the afternoon session, but did not appropriate funds for them at this time.
It is still unclear exactly what the budget includes. Hopefully, details will be posted on the county website to dispel the notion that the budget process is more than the artful use of smoke and mirrors.
Although only two citizens denounced the advertised two cent tax rate increase at last week’s public hearing, supervisors were well aware that their constituents found no favor with a tax hike in this perilous economy.
Because the value of county property increased nine tenths of one percent following last year’s reassessment, the county will take in a bit more money using the same tax rate.
The supervisors also voted to begin the process, which will include at least one public hearing, to change the frequency of reassessment from every two years to an annual valuation.
Glenn Branham, county assessor, contended that an annual assessment better reflects current changes in property values, both increases and decreases, than doing the deed every two years.
Branham reported to the board that of the 100 or so property owners objecting to their reassessments, only 22 are proceeding to the Board of Equalization. It is unclear if this small number of protests out of more than 14,000 parcels evaluated indicates grudging acceptance by tax payers, or reluctance to challenge government.
Two property owners from the Huntleigh subdivision in Maidens told the board that the assessed valuation of every lot in their subdivision, regardless of size, location or other features, increased by $25,000. They contended that increase was arbitrary and questioned the validity of the entire assessment process.
In other matters, the proposed water quality improvement ordinance that caused a great deal of confusion and consternation was sent back to the planning commission for clarification.
Two Kinloch residents asked the board why the odor problem in their water has not yet been fixed. Don Charles, director of community development and overseer of the utility department explained that an automatic flushing device will be installed in the near future. Manual flushing, opening a fire hydrant, is being used in the meantime.
Charles was optimistic that the automatic flusher will aerate the water to sufficiently diffuse the chlorine and make it acceptable to add to the local environment after eliminating the pesky odors.
Charles contended that the problem will diminish as more homes, and users, come to Kinloch. This problem is not unique to Kinloch, he explained.
The board voted to name the riverfront park under development “Tucker’s Park at Maidens Crossing” paying homage to names associated with the area where Maidens Road crosses the James.
Fire-rescue chief Ken Brown reported that the county’s first 10 career EMT/firefighters are in place with two advanced life support positions still in the advertisement stage.
In addition to forming duty crews answer calls to ensure the needs of the citizens were met during the transition period, Brown said that volunteers put in more than 300 hours helping to screen, train and prepare the career staff for duty. This bodes well for the future of fire-rescue, whose volunteers have been saving lives and protecting property in Goochland for more than 50 years. The incredible amount of time, talent and dedication that county volunteers have given to citizen service can never be valued.
Virginia Broadband, the company that will provide wireless broadband to at least part of the county, will begin its lease on the WZEZ tower west of Gum Spring on May 1. Paul Drumwright, assistant to the county administrator reported that, like many small companies, VBB is finding it difficult to borrow funds for short term operating expenses given the strange banking environment.
The forensic auditors have been hard at work in the utilities department for about two weeks and are expected to be there for another two before returning to their office to prepare their report, Charles told the supervisors.
The board has interviewed candidates for a new county administrator, though no announcements were made.
During a somewhat difficult to follow public discussion at their workshop this morning, the Goochland board of supervisors decided to hold the real estate tax rate steady at 53 cents per $100 of assessed valuation.
In their afternoon session, the board approved a budget for fiscal 09-10, which begins on July 1, of $57,089,163 and a tax rate if 53 cents. The ad valorem tax on property in the Tuckahoe Creek Service District will also hold fast at 23 cents, which is levied in addition to the property tax.
The budget amount was reduced by the cost of funding projects in the county’s capital improvement plan. The board approved the CIP items the afternoon session, but did not appropriate funds for them at this time.
It is still unclear exactly what the budget includes. Hopefully, details will be posted on the county website to dispel the notion that the budget process is more than the artful use of smoke and mirrors.
Although only two citizens denounced the advertised two cent tax rate increase at last week’s public hearing, supervisors were well aware that their constituents found no favor with a tax hike in this perilous economy.
Because the value of county property increased nine tenths of one percent following last year’s reassessment, the county will take in a bit more money using the same tax rate.
The supervisors also voted to begin the process, which will include at least one public hearing, to change the frequency of reassessment from every two years to an annual valuation.
Glenn Branham, county assessor, contended that an annual assessment better reflects current changes in property values, both increases and decreases, than doing the deed every two years.
Branham reported to the board that of the 100 or so property owners objecting to their reassessments, only 22 are proceeding to the Board of Equalization. It is unclear if this small number of protests out of more than 14,000 parcels evaluated indicates grudging acceptance by tax payers, or reluctance to challenge government.
Two property owners from the Huntleigh subdivision in Maidens told the board that the assessed valuation of every lot in their subdivision, regardless of size, location or other features, increased by $25,000. They contended that increase was arbitrary and questioned the validity of the entire assessment process.
In other matters, the proposed water quality improvement ordinance that caused a great deal of confusion and consternation was sent back to the planning commission for clarification.
Two Kinloch residents asked the board why the odor problem in their water has not yet been fixed. Don Charles, director of community development and overseer of the utility department explained that an automatic flushing device will be installed in the near future. Manual flushing, opening a fire hydrant, is being used in the meantime.
Charles was optimistic that the automatic flusher will aerate the water to sufficiently diffuse the chlorine and make it acceptable to add to the local environment after eliminating the pesky odors.
Charles contended that the problem will diminish as more homes, and users, come to Kinloch. This problem is not unique to Kinloch, he explained.
The board voted to name the riverfront park under development “Tucker’s Park at Maidens Crossing” paying homage to names associated with the area where Maidens Road crosses the James.
Fire-rescue chief Ken Brown reported that the county’s first 10 career EMT/firefighters are in place with two advanced life support positions still in the advertisement stage.
In addition to forming duty crews answer calls to ensure the needs of the citizens were met during the transition period, Brown said that volunteers put in more than 300 hours helping to screen, train and prepare the career staff for duty. This bodes well for the future of fire-rescue, whose volunteers have been saving lives and protecting property in Goochland for more than 50 years. The incredible amount of time, talent and dedication that county volunteers have given to citizen service can never be valued.
Virginia Broadband, the company that will provide wireless broadband to at least part of the county, will begin its lease on the WZEZ tower west of Gum Spring on May 1. Paul Drumwright, assistant to the county administrator reported that, like many small companies, VBB is finding it difficult to borrow funds for short term operating expenses given the strange banking environment.
The forensic auditors have been hard at work in the utilities department for about two weeks and are expected to be there for another two before returning to their office to prepare their report, Charles told the supervisors.
The board has interviewed candidates for a new county administrator, though no announcements were made.
Monday, April 6, 2009
April showers bring fiscal flowers
Spring sun shines on new budget
On Tuesday, April 7, the board of supervisors will vote on the 2009 tax rates, which are retroactive to January 1. The adoption of the tax rate in early April allows time to prepare and mail out tax bills due in early June.
The supervisors held a public hearing on an advertised tax rate of 55 cents per $100 of assessed valuation, a two cent increase over last year, on March 31. Only two citizens rose to protest the increase. This lack of comment is more the result of ignorance of the proposed increase rather than agreement with the rise, which amounts to an additional $20 tax for each $100,000 of assessed valuation.
At the hearing, interim county administrator Lane Ramsey presented a budget that was about $61 million instead of the approximately $57 million advertised.
The packet for tomorrow’s meeting, includes a cryptic memo from Ramsey to the supervisors stating that the rate to be voted on during the afternoon session will be determined following discussion at the morning workshop session. The packet may be viewed in its entirety at www.co.goochland.va.us click on supervisors and then packet. (Be advised that this is a large file best downloaded with a high-speed connection.)
Setting the tax rate is the most delicate part of the board’s duties. On the one hand, they must ensure that the health, safety and welfare needs of the citizens are met. On the other hand, they must be mindful of the burden that high tax rate place on citizens.
Local levies are the purest form of taxation. Local tax dollars stay close to home. They build and run schools, pay teachers, deputies and now some fire-rescue providers. Those salaries in turn find their way into local businesses that generate sales tax, some of which go back into county coffers.
Property tax dollars do not go to Richmond or Washington to be massaged and diluted by bureaucrats before, perhaps, trickling back in far smaller amounts.
Local taxes are the hardest to raise. People must write checks for those taxes, unlike payroll taxes, which earners never see. Also, local officials are far more accessible than those in Richmond or Washington.
Why do taxes increase? Probably because government is doing more than it should be. On the other hand, people demand more services from the government then complain because their taxes rise. They seem to think that the other guy’s taxes should go up to pay for what they want.
This year’s proposed tax rate may simply be a reflection of realities of past year fiscal shenanigans and needed to stay even. The two cent increase may well represent level funding.
Instead of determining a tax rate and then working backwards to make the budget numbers fit, as was done in the past, this year’s numbers may well reflect what the county will actually spend.
Ramsey began his government service as an accountant, a skill not possessed by anyone on the county staff, and is applying those skills to Goochland’s budget. This is a novel departure from past practices and is causing a lot of heartburn. As he pokes among the dank county budget processes, interesting creatures must be coming to light.
In the past, the supervisors eagerly accepted magical budgets divined by the former county administrator. Those budgets sailed though the dog and pony shows of public hearing and tax rate adoptions. When citizen attention turned to other things, supplemental appropriations were voted into place so that the bills, with the possible exception of those in the utility department, got paid.
So tomorrow we will see if the board is willing to acknowledge that they have been cluelessly voting on budgets that did not reflect reality in the past and change their ways. Or, will they seek cover and revert to the comfort of magical budgeting.
Sunshine can be painful to eyes long kept in the dark.
On Tuesday, April 7, the board of supervisors will vote on the 2009 tax rates, which are retroactive to January 1. The adoption of the tax rate in early April allows time to prepare and mail out tax bills due in early June.
The supervisors held a public hearing on an advertised tax rate of 55 cents per $100 of assessed valuation, a two cent increase over last year, on March 31. Only two citizens rose to protest the increase. This lack of comment is more the result of ignorance of the proposed increase rather than agreement with the rise, which amounts to an additional $20 tax for each $100,000 of assessed valuation.
At the hearing, interim county administrator Lane Ramsey presented a budget that was about $61 million instead of the approximately $57 million advertised.
The packet for tomorrow’s meeting, includes a cryptic memo from Ramsey to the supervisors stating that the rate to be voted on during the afternoon session will be determined following discussion at the morning workshop session. The packet may be viewed in its entirety at www.co.goochland.va.us click on supervisors and then packet. (Be advised that this is a large file best downloaded with a high-speed connection.)
Setting the tax rate is the most delicate part of the board’s duties. On the one hand, they must ensure that the health, safety and welfare needs of the citizens are met. On the other hand, they must be mindful of the burden that high tax rate place on citizens.
Local levies are the purest form of taxation. Local tax dollars stay close to home. They build and run schools, pay teachers, deputies and now some fire-rescue providers. Those salaries in turn find their way into local businesses that generate sales tax, some of which go back into county coffers.
Property tax dollars do not go to Richmond or Washington to be massaged and diluted by bureaucrats before, perhaps, trickling back in far smaller amounts.
Local taxes are the hardest to raise. People must write checks for those taxes, unlike payroll taxes, which earners never see. Also, local officials are far more accessible than those in Richmond or Washington.
Why do taxes increase? Probably because government is doing more than it should be. On the other hand, people demand more services from the government then complain because their taxes rise. They seem to think that the other guy’s taxes should go up to pay for what they want.
This year’s proposed tax rate may simply be a reflection of realities of past year fiscal shenanigans and needed to stay even. The two cent increase may well represent level funding.
Instead of determining a tax rate and then working backwards to make the budget numbers fit, as was done in the past, this year’s numbers may well reflect what the county will actually spend.
Ramsey began his government service as an accountant, a skill not possessed by anyone on the county staff, and is applying those skills to Goochland’s budget. This is a novel departure from past practices and is causing a lot of heartburn. As he pokes among the dank county budget processes, interesting creatures must be coming to light.
In the past, the supervisors eagerly accepted magical budgets divined by the former county administrator. Those budgets sailed though the dog and pony shows of public hearing and tax rate adoptions. When citizen attention turned to other things, supplemental appropriations were voted into place so that the bills, with the possible exception of those in the utility department, got paid.
So tomorrow we will see if the board is willing to acknowledge that they have been cluelessly voting on budgets that did not reflect reality in the past and change their ways. Or, will they seek cover and revert to the comfort of magical budgeting.
Sunshine can be painful to eyes long kept in the dark.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
This is no April Fool
County property tax rate increase likely
Only two people rose to protest the proposed two cent increase in the Goochland County real estate tax rate at last night’s public hearing on next year’s county budget. Many in attendance left the meeting scratching their heads.
The real surprise of the evening was a proposed budget, presented by interim county administrator Lane Ramsey, recommending county expenditures of $61,167,888 for the 2009-10 fiscal year, which begins on July 1.
Advertisement for the hearing indicated a $57,894,897 budget was up for comment.
Last fall, in anticipation of lean times, county departments were told to prepare flat funded budgets. Raises, new equipment, programs and personnel went out the window. Most travel and educational expense, except that needed for some employees to maintain professional credentials, was removed.
The resulting requested countywide budget was .9 percent lower that that for the current year.
The school system stepped up to the plate and prepared a budget that was smaller than that for the current fiscal year.
All this was undertaken to permit the county to operate on the revenues collected from the prevailing 53 cent property tax rate.
It should be noted that property taxes account for less than half of the revenue used to fund county operations. The proposed school budget, $27,110,064, is more than the $25,262,203 expected to be generated by the 55 cent rate. The remainder is derived from a number of other sources including user fees and funds from state and federal governments.
Ramsey recommended a somewhat bewildering series of moves within the budget, reallocating certain funds in the school budget, for instance, to be supplanted by money expected from the federal stimulus funds.
He also recommended funding of several items in the capital improvement budget including some athletic fields.
Doug Kinney of Maidens, who protested the rate increase, likened the athletic fields to a pedicure, “a little luxury that you can live without.”
School superintendent Dr. Linda Underwood told the board that the rules about using federal stimulus funds are just starting to trickle in. So far, she said, it is clear that stimulus funds may be used for brick and mortar projects used for instructional purposes only. That would preclude their use for the multipurpose rooms planned for Byrd and Randolph elementary schools.
Ramsey recommended removal of contributions to organizations that the county has supported in the past. Most of these, such as the Science Museum of Virginia, CenterStage and Virginia State University are outside the county. The Center for Rural Culture, sponsor of the Goochland Farmers Market, was also removed from the contribution list.
The penny of tax, approximately $425,000, set aside for conservation and open space uses was deleted from the spending plan.
Last month, Ramsey informed the board that there would be an unexpected shortfall in the amount of personal property tax because the value of older vehicles has dropped and fewer citizens are buying new ones. He suggested the two cent increase to cover that deficiency.
The amount of the rate increase, $20 per $100,000 of valuation, $100 on a $500,000 house, does not seem onerous at first blush. However, if it represents the start of a creeping rise in tax rates, it’s troubling indeed. For property owners who have lost jobs or income, every nickel must be squeezed three times before it is spent. The rest of us wonder why the county can’t make ends meet.
It’s hard to tell if this $61 million budget is a more realistic look at the county’s absolute needs for next year than the one created using the 53 cent rate.
A few years ago, the board seems to have decided to hold the rate steady at 53 cents adjusting for reassessments. The supervisors enjoyed looking like fiscal heroes. However, those budgets were supplemented throughout the year, so it was difficult to tell exactly where the bottom line was.
Perhaps, the $61 million budget is real rather than fiscal fiction.
Unfortunately, the last minute increase and switching around may have breached the trust between the various departments and the board. It did nothing to bolster the dwindling citizen trust in elected officials.
Departments that worked hard in good faith to pare their needs to the bone might well be wary to repeat those actions in the future.
The board needs to tread carefully through this economic minefield. It may well be a long slog, because no one knows how long or how deep this fiscal downturn will be.
This is no April Fool
County property tax rate increase likely
Only two people rose to protest the proposed two cent increase in the Goochland County real estate tax rate at last night’s public hearing on next year’s county budget. Many in attendance left the meeting scratching their heads.
The real surprise of the evening was a proposed budget, presented by interim county administrator Lane Ramsey, recommending county expenditures of $61,167,888 for the 2009-10 fiscal year, which begins on July 1.
Advertisement for the hearing indicated a $57,894,897 budget was up for comment.
Last fall, in anticipation of lean times, county departments were told to prepare flat funded budgets. Raises, new equipment, programs and personnel went out the window. Most travel and educational expense, except that needed for some employees to maintain professional credentials, was removed.
The resulting requested countywide budget was .9 percent lower that that for the current year.
The school system stepped up to the plate and prepared a budget that was smaller than that for the current fiscal year.
All this was undertaken to permit the county to operate on the revenues collected from the prevailing 53 cent property tax rate.
It should be noted that property taxes account for less than half of the revenue used to fund county operations. The proposed school budget, $27,110,064, is more than the $25,262,203 expected to be generated by the 55 cent rate. The remainder is derived from a number of other sources including user fees and funds from state and federal governments.
Ramsey recommended a somewhat bewildering series of moves within the budget, reallocating certain funds in the school budget, for instance, to be supplanted by money expected from the federal stimulus funds.
He also recommended funding of several items in the capital improvement budget including some athletic fields.
Doug Kinney of Maidens, who protested the rate increase, likened the athletic fields to a pedicure, “a little luxury that you can live without.”
School superintendent Dr. Linda Underwood told the board that the rules about using federal stimulus funds are just starting to trickle in. So far, she said, it is clear that stimulus funds may be used for brick and mortar projects used for instructional purposes only. That would preclude their use for the multipurpose rooms planned for Byrd and Randolph elementary schools.
Ramsey recommended removal of contributions to organizations that the county has supported in the past. Most of these, such as the Science Museum of Virginia, CenterStage and Virginia State University are outside the county. The Center for Rural Culture, sponsor of the Goochland Farmers Market, was also removed from the contribution list.
The penny of tax, approximately $425,000, set aside for conservation and open space uses was deleted from the spending plan.
Last month, Ramsey informed the board that there would be an unexpected shortfall in the amount of personal property tax because the value of older vehicles has dropped and fewer citizens are buying new ones. He suggested the two cent increase to cover that deficiency.
The amount of the rate increase, $20 per $100,000 of valuation, $100 on a $500,000 house, does not seem onerous at first blush. However, if it represents the start of a creeping rise in tax rates, it’s troubling indeed. For property owners who have lost jobs or income, every nickel must be squeezed three times before it is spent. The rest of us wonder why the county can’t make ends meet.
It’s hard to tell if this $61 million budget is a more realistic look at the county’s absolute needs for next year than the one created using the 53 cent rate.
A few years ago, the board seems to have decided to hold the rate steady at 53 cents adjusting for reassessments. The supervisors enjoyed looking like fiscal heroes. However, those budgets were supplemented throughout the year, so it was difficult to tell exactly where the bottom line was.
Perhaps, the $61 million budget is real rather than fiscal fiction.
Unfortunately, the last minute increase and switching around may have breached the trust between the various departments and the board. It did nothing to bolster the dwindling citizen trust in elected officials.
Departments that worked hard in good faith to pare their needs to the bone might well be wary to repeat those actions in the future.
The board needs to tread carefully through this economic minefield. It may well be a long slog, because no one knows how long or how deep this fiscal downturn will be.
Only two people rose to protest the proposed two cent increase in the Goochland County real estate tax rate at last night’s public hearing on next year’s county budget. Many in attendance left the meeting scratching their heads.
The real surprise of the evening was a proposed budget, presented by interim county administrator Lane Ramsey, recommending county expenditures of $61,167,888 for the 2009-10 fiscal year, which begins on July 1.
Advertisement for the hearing indicated a $57,894,897 budget was up for comment.
Last fall, in anticipation of lean times, county departments were told to prepare flat funded budgets. Raises, new equipment, programs and personnel went out the window. Most travel and educational expense, except that needed for some employees to maintain professional credentials, was removed.
The resulting requested countywide budget was .9 percent lower that that for the current year.
The school system stepped up to the plate and prepared a budget that was smaller than that for the current fiscal year.
All this was undertaken to permit the county to operate on the revenues collected from the prevailing 53 cent property tax rate.
It should be noted that property taxes account for less than half of the revenue used to fund county operations. The proposed school budget, $27,110,064, is more than the $25,262,203 expected to be generated by the 55 cent rate. The remainder is derived from a number of other sources including user fees and funds from state and federal governments.
Ramsey recommended a somewhat bewildering series of moves within the budget, reallocating certain funds in the school budget, for instance, to be supplanted by money expected from the federal stimulus funds.
He also recommended funding of several items in the capital improvement budget including some athletic fields.
Doug Kinney of Maidens, who protested the rate increase, likened the athletic fields to a pedicure, “a little luxury that you can live without.”
School superintendent Dr. Linda Underwood told the board that the rules about using federal stimulus funds are just starting to trickle in. So far, she said, it is clear that stimulus funds may be used for brick and mortar projects used for instructional purposes only. That would preclude their use for the multipurpose rooms planned for Byrd and Randolph elementary schools.
Ramsey recommended removal of contributions to organizations that the county has supported in the past. Most of these, such as the Science Museum of Virginia, CenterStage and Virginia State University are outside the county. The Center for Rural Culture, sponsor of the Goochland Farmers Market, was also removed from the contribution list.
The penny of tax, approximately $425,000, set aside for conservation and open space uses was deleted from the spending plan.
Last month, Ramsey informed the board that there would be an unexpected shortfall in the amount of personal property tax because the value of older vehicles has dropped and fewer citizens are buying new ones. He suggested the two cent increase to cover that deficiency.
The amount of the rate increase, $20 per $100,000 of valuation, $100 on a $500,000 house, does not seem onerous at first blush. However, if it represents the start of a creeping rise in tax rates, it’s troubling indeed. For property owners who have lost jobs or income, every nickel must be squeezed three times before it is spent. The rest of us wonder why the county can’t make ends meet.
It’s hard to tell if this $61 million budget is a more realistic look at the county’s absolute needs for next year than the one created using the 53 cent rate.
A few years ago, the board seems to have decided to hold the rate steady at 53 cents adjusting for reassessments. The supervisors enjoyed looking like fiscal heroes. However, those budgets were supplemented throughout the year, so it was difficult to tell exactly where the bottom line was.
Perhaps, the $61 million budget is real rather than fiscal fiction.
Unfortunately, the last minute increase and switching around may have breached the trust between the various departments and the board. It did nothing to bolster the dwindling citizen trust in elected officials.
Departments that worked hard in good faith to pare their needs to the bone might well be wary to repeat those actions in the future.
The board needs to tread carefully through this economic minefield. It may well be a long slog, because no one knows how long or how deep this fiscal downturn will be.
This is no April Fool
County property tax rate increase likely
Only two people rose to protest the proposed two cent increase in the Goochland County real estate tax rate at last night’s public hearing on next year’s county budget. Many in attendance left the meeting scratching their heads.
The real surprise of the evening was a proposed budget, presented by interim county administrator Lane Ramsey, recommending county expenditures of $61,167,888 for the 2009-10 fiscal year, which begins on July 1.
Advertisement for the hearing indicated a $57,894,897 budget was up for comment.
Last fall, in anticipation of lean times, county departments were told to prepare flat funded budgets. Raises, new equipment, programs and personnel went out the window. Most travel and educational expense, except that needed for some employees to maintain professional credentials, was removed.
The resulting requested countywide budget was .9 percent lower that that for the current year.
The school system stepped up to the plate and prepared a budget that was smaller than that for the current fiscal year.
All this was undertaken to permit the county to operate on the revenues collected from the prevailing 53 cent property tax rate.
It should be noted that property taxes account for less than half of the revenue used to fund county operations. The proposed school budget, $27,110,064, is more than the $25,262,203 expected to be generated by the 55 cent rate. The remainder is derived from a number of other sources including user fees and funds from state and federal governments.
Ramsey recommended a somewhat bewildering series of moves within the budget, reallocating certain funds in the school budget, for instance, to be supplanted by money expected from the federal stimulus funds.
He also recommended funding of several items in the capital improvement budget including some athletic fields.
Doug Kinney of Maidens, who protested the rate increase, likened the athletic fields to a pedicure, “a little luxury that you can live without.”
School superintendent Dr. Linda Underwood told the board that the rules about using federal stimulus funds are just starting to trickle in. So far, she said, it is clear that stimulus funds may be used for brick and mortar projects used for instructional purposes only. That would preclude their use for the multipurpose rooms planned for Byrd and Randolph elementary schools.
Ramsey recommended removal of contributions to organizations that the county has supported in the past. Most of these, such as the Science Museum of Virginia, CenterStage and Virginia State University are outside the county. The Center for Rural Culture, sponsor of the Goochland Farmers Market, was also removed from the contribution list.
The penny of tax, approximately $425,000, set aside for conservation and open space uses was deleted from the spending plan.
Last month, Ramsey informed the board that there would be an unexpected shortfall in the amount of personal property tax because the value of older vehicles has dropped and fewer citizens are buying new ones. He suggested the two cent increase to cover that deficiency.
The amount of the rate increase, $20 per $100,000 of valuation, $100 on a $500,000 house, does not seem onerous at first blush. However, if it represents the start of a creeping rise in tax rates, it’s troubling indeed. For property owners who have lost jobs or income, every nickel must be squeezed three times before it is spent. The rest of us wonder why the county can’t make ends meet.
It’s hard to tell if this $61 million budget is a more realistic look at the county’s absolute needs for next year than the one created using the 53 cent rate.
A few years ago, the board seems to have decided to hold the rate steady at 53 cents adjusting for reassessments. The supervisors enjoyed looking like fiscal heroes. However, those budgets were supplemented throughout the year, so it was difficult to tell exactly where the bottom line was.
Perhaps, the $61 million budget is real rather than fiscal fiction.
Unfortunately, the last minute increase and switching around may have breached the trust between the various departments and the board. It did nothing to bolster the dwindling citizen trust in elected officials.
Departments that worked hard in good faith to pare their needs to the bone might well be wary to repeat those actions in the future.
The board needs to tread carefully through this economic minefield. It may well be a long slog, because no one knows how long or how deep this fiscal downturn will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)