Print
E-mail
Comment
Proposed tax increase angers public
By ALEX WUKMAN
It was a scene straight from Hollywood; the midmorning sun slicing down through the pine trees outside of the San Jacinto County Courthouse. Inside the courthouse, dozens of residents filled with frustration and fear packed into the overcrowded commissioners court.
“I’m scared to death that I’m going to lose my house,” said one male retiree from the gallery. Another said that for “reasons of self preservation,” the San Jacinto County Commissioners Court might want to undertake an audit of the Central Appraisal District’s (CAD) tax values.
The CAD determined that the average taxable value of a residence in San Jacinto County went up by approximately $12,000 this year. The average taxable value of a home in the 2007-2008 budget year was $83,193.00; the CAD determined that the average value in 2008-2009 budget year is $95,002.00.
The palpable frustration of many in the room came because they felt that the commissioners court was pleading that they were helpless in making any changes.
“We appointed one person to the CAD, Shepherd School district appointed one and Coldspring School District appointed three,” said County Judge Fritz Faulkner.
Faulkner also stated that the majority of property taxes in the county go to SISD and COCISD. Both of which have rates much higher than San Jacinto County’s.
Shepherd Independent School District has a property tax rate of $1.36 per $100 of taxable valuation, which is a $0.009 decrease from last year’s rate. Coldspring-Oakhurst Consolidated Independent School District has a tax rate of $1.115 per $100 of taxable valuation, which is a $0.02.5 increase over the previous year’s rate.
The fear that colored the faces of the many elderly residents at the public hearing came from what they saw as a proposed property tax increase on the part of San Jacinto County. However, the proposed rate of $0.6287 is identical to the 2007-2008 tax rate, a fact that led Pct. 2 Commissioner Royce Wells to state that this is the first time in the five years that he has served as a commissioner that the rate hasn’t gone down from one year to the next.
Although because of increases in the appraised value of property, the rate is expected to raise taxes by 11 percent throughout the county. This led one retired man to state to the commissioners that they “keep coming back to the same pocket and asking for more, but what happens when that pocket is empty?”
Some of the assembled citizens were going through copies of the budget trying to find ways to cut costs so the county could lower property taxes. This led Pct. 2 Commissioner David Brandon to state that “a one-cent reduction in property tax equates to a $138,000 revenue gap.”
County Judge Fritz Faulkner and the precinct commissioners explained that they were maintaining the tax rate instead of lowering it because of increased debt service obligations.
That answer wasn’t good enough for some of the crowd.
“Why can’t we keep things status quo?” asked the retiree who was afraid of losing his home in a voice that was almost a shout.
Faulkner explained that “a year ago we didn’t have the jail to pay off.”
He also stated that it is necessary to increase county funds because the rising cost of fuel was eating into the budget everywhere, particularly in the road and bridge funds.
“They don’t make plug-in electric bulldozers,” said Faulkner. Some of the assembled citizens were advocating a drastic alternative to raising property taxes, eliminating an across-the-board 3 percent raise for the county’s 136 employees and cutting their benefits.
Pct. 1 Commissioner Michael Griffith was not even going to entertain the idea of cutting benefits.
“I have guys working for me for less than $30,000 a year. Good guys who could get paid better elsewhere but they stay because of the benefits. I don’t care who they are, they deserve these benefits. We owe them this,” Griffith said, as he pounded the table for emphasis.
The next public hearing on the budget and proposed tax rate will be Monday, September 8, at 9 a.m. at the San Jacinto County Courthouse.
“I’m scared to death that I’m going to lose my house,” said one male retiree from the gallery. Another said that for “reasons of self preservation,” the San Jacinto County Commissioners Court might want to undertake an audit of the Central Appraisal District’s (CAD) tax values.
The CAD determined that the average taxable value of a residence in San Jacinto County went up by approximately $12,000 this year. The average taxable value of a home in the 2007-2008 budget year was $83,193.00; the CAD determined that the average value in 2008-2009 budget year is $95,002.00.
The palpable frustration of many in the room came because they felt that the commissioners court was pleading that they were helpless in making any changes.
“We appointed one person to the CAD, Shepherd School district appointed one and Coldspring School District appointed three,” said County Judge Fritz Faulkner.
Faulkner also stated that the majority of property taxes in the county go to SISD and COCISD. Both of which have rates much higher than San Jacinto County’s.
Shepherd Independent School District has a property tax rate of $1.36 per $100 of taxable valuation, which is a $0.009 decrease from last year’s rate. Coldspring-Oakhurst Consolidated Independent School District has a tax rate of $1.115 per $100 of taxable valuation, which is a $0.02.5 increase over the previous year’s rate.
The fear that colored the faces of the many elderly residents at the public hearing came from what they saw as a proposed property tax increase on the part of San Jacinto County. However, the proposed rate of $0.6287 is identical to the 2007-2008 tax rate, a fact that led Pct. 2 Commissioner Royce Wells to state that this is the first time in the five years that he has served as a commissioner that the rate hasn’t gone down from one year to the next.
Although because of increases in the appraised value of property, the rate is expected to raise taxes by 11 percent throughout the county. This led one retired man to state to the commissioners that they “keep coming back to the same pocket and asking for more, but what happens when that pocket is empty?”
Some of the assembled citizens were going through copies of the budget trying to find ways to cut costs so the county could lower property taxes. This led Pct. 2 Commissioner David Brandon to state that “a one-cent reduction in property tax equates to a $138,000 revenue gap.”
County Judge Fritz Faulkner and the precinct commissioners explained that they were maintaining the tax rate instead of lowering it because of increased debt service obligations.
That answer wasn’t good enough for some of the crowd.
“Why can’t we keep things status quo?” asked the retiree who was afraid of losing his home in a voice that was almost a shout.
Faulkner explained that “a year ago we didn’t have the jail to pay off.”
He also stated that it is necessary to increase county funds because the rising cost of fuel was eating into the budget everywhere, particularly in the road and bridge funds.
“They don’t make plug-in electric bulldozers,” said Faulkner. Some of the assembled citizens were advocating a drastic alternative to raising property taxes, eliminating an across-the-board 3 percent raise for the county’s 136 employees and cutting their benefits.
Pct. 1 Commissioner Michael Griffith was not even going to entertain the idea of cutting benefits.
“I have guys working for me for less than $30,000 a year. Good guys who could get paid better elsewhere but they stay because of the benefits. I don’t care who they are, they deserve these benefits. We owe them this,” Griffith said, as he pounded the table for emphasis.
The next public hearing on the budget and proposed tax rate will be Monday, September 8, at 9 a.m. at the San Jacinto County Courthouse.
Submit a Comment
|
You must be logged in to post a comment.
|
Not yet a registered member?
Click here to become one. Comments to stories and articles on the Web site are not edited or pre-approved before appearing online. Readers posting comments are solely responsible for those comments. Comments must be germane to the story to which they apply. Online comments that are libelous, profane or personally attack another site participant can be reported as abuse using the link provided on each comment. Comments reported as abusive will be reviewed and may be removed from view, as will off-topic comments. BE CIVIL. Individuals continually posting abusive comments to the site may have their registrations revoked. |
