 |
| ||||||
Text Size 
• Email • Printer Friendly
|
Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:27 AM Right to bypass public on tax increases on slate for legislation By Eddie Fitzgerald | Times Staff Writer When members of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners meet next week in Raleigh to hone their legislative goals for the year, the top priority could be to bypass the public when it comes to counties raising some tax revenues. During a NCACC board of directors meeting last month, the Legislative Goals Committee proposed a "revenue options and protection" option as the association's top priority goal for the 2009-10 legislative session. If approved by the legislature, it would allow counties to enact by resolution any or all "revenue options from among those that have been authorized for any other county, including local option sales taxes, impact taxes, real estate transfer taxes and prepared food taxes, and to preserve the existing local revenue base." Jason King, NCACC assistant communications director, said if the county delegates vote for the revenue options and protection option and the General Assembly approves it, the measure would allow counties to bypass a public referendum and give boards of commissioners the authority to pass revenue options, including a 0.25 cent additional sales tax and a 0.4 percent land transfer tax. Wilson County voted down the 0.25 cent sales tax increase in May. "Obviously counties that have put (the sales tax and land transfer tax) on the ballots have not had a lot of success," King said. Out of the 50 referendums on ballots in the state proposing an additional sales tax during 2007-2008 only eight were passed. Twenty-two ballots in the state had the land transfer tax on them. None of those referendums passed. "Counties have sought these options for a number of years," King said. "... Counties have taken the position that what one county has our county should have and the state should leave it up to the board of commissioners how they raise taxes, whether through property taxes, sales taxes or land transfer taxes. Counties like to have the option on how best to raise revenue rather than whenever the state mandates something they have to raise property taxes." There are only six counties in the state that have a land transfer tax. In 1985-86, Dare, Currituck, Chowan and Camden counties were given the authority by the state to implement a land transfer tax through a resolution. Pasquotank and Perquimans counties passed land transfer taxes that same year through a public referendum, and voters in Washington County did not pass the tax. Initially the land transfer tax could only go toward schools. If the new proposal passes the General Assembly, revenue from the tax would not be earmarked, King said. Wilson County Commissioner Grady Robbins, who is the county's delegate at next week's meeting, said he is neutral on the revenue option proposal. "I know we do need options for schools, both the community college and public schools," he said. "Plus, times are tight in the economy right now. It might be an option." Robbins said he did vote for the 0.25 cent additional sales tax referendum that failed in May. "The county does need optional funding to try to hold property taxes as low as possible," he said. "People who did not vote for it (additional sales tax), those same people and the rest of us are mandated to pay for so many things, and if we don't get additional revenue we will probably have to have a property tax increase. I hope we do not have to do that. But the writing is on the wall. "We need more services," he said. "When you get 911 calls and don't have ambulances to go to the scene -- whether it is a loved one or anyone -- it is not good. We have to have a good law enforcement system, good schools. People demand services. But when you talk about taxes, they hate that. It's just human nature." Wilson County Commissioner Roger Lucas said he is opposed to the proposal that will go before the association. He will attend the conference as a member of the NCACC's Agriculture Steering Committee. Also going will be Commissioner Chairman Frank Emory, member of the NCACC's Finance Committee. "If the General Assembly allows the legislation to be changed, it will give county commissioners the privy to vote on it (revenue sources) without putting it in front of the people," Lucas said. "I definitely want public hearings and to get the public's input." Lucas said he didn't think the public's perception has changed since not voting for the sales tax increase. But if people have changed their mind, Lucas said he would like to hear from them in a public forum. "If you are going to put a burden on the people, you should be able to ask the people to vote on it," he said. When the taxes did not pass, Lucas said it was a message the public was sending to the government. "Very few counties passed it," he said. "I think the public was telling the government they need to look inside themselves and spend money more wisely. I think the people were saying, 'Look, we can't stand much more of a burden. You need to start making cuts.' Maybe there are some services some people are willing to do without." N.C. Rep. Joe Tolson said he thought it would be difficult to raise any taxes at this time because of the state of the economy. "Since the referendums failed, I don't see the legislators coming back and saying, 'Yeah we will pass a resolution without the say so of the people,'" Tolson said. "I think it would be a very difficult situation in my opinion. I think it would be very difficult to get an initiative like that passed." eddie@wilsontimes.com | 265-7820 |
| Add Comment: | |  | | (All comments must be approved) |
| View Comments: | | | | (4 comments) |
Kay Hannaford said...
Here we go again. Our County Commissioners have not been responsible with this county's tax dollars and the people know that.(ie: Miller Mahal)You can't squeeze blood from a turnip, so this is just another attempt to "have their way" with taxes and spending. When the community voted down the other attempt to pass taxes, that should have sent a message loud and clear. How much does that building cost taxpayers a month? How much was spent on furnishings to make it so fancy? We have not seen responsible decisions.If we had faith and trust in our leaders, we may not be opposed to chip in a bit more, but those in charge have not earned that trust. I would hope that this legislation is voted down. As a previous poster said, it is "taxation without representation."
Thursday, January 08, 2009 at 5:39 PM
italiano said...Here we go again. Our County Commissioners have not been responsible with this county's tax dollars and the people know that.(ie: Miller Mahal)You can't squeeze blood from a turnip, so this is just another attempt to "have their way" with taxes and spending. When the community voted down the other attempt to pass taxes, that should have sent a message loud and clear. How much does that building cost taxpayers a month? How much was spent on furnishings to make it so fancy? We have not seen responsible decisions.If we had faith and trust in our leaders, we may not be opposed to chip in a bit more, but those in charge have not earned that trust. I would hope that this legislation is voted down. As a previous poster said, it is "taxation without representation."
Thursday, January 08, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Perhaps the County could've gained greater revenues from the recent tax revaluation if the process had been done more evenly. I can't help but wonder if there's ever any research as to spending..? Tax increases are not a cure all for budget shortfalls.
Thursday, January 08, 2009 at 5:28 PM
"taxation without representation" - wasn't there a war over that?! (yes, i do know what war it was)
Thursday, January 08, 2009 at 12:49 PM
When cities and counties become fiscally responsible taxpayer may not mind so much when taxes have to increase, but when the cities and counties (like ours) seem to act irresponsible with OUR money we will not stand to see our taxes go up. Before they raise taxes, the governing body should be required to publish a complete annual statement accounting for every dime that was spent.
Thursday, January 08, 2009 at 12:36 PM
