Mocobizscene- Following months of deliberations and budget cuts, Virginia raised its general fund levy by 4% on Tuesday evening. The City Council heard from a room full of worried taxpayers for approximately 4 1/2 hours, rejected two motions (for 5.22% and 2%) and struggled to reach a final percentage.
Councilor Liz Motley seconded Councilor Julianne Paulsen’s move to raise the threshold to 4%. Ultimately, they cast their votes in favour of it, as did Mayor Larry Cuffe Jr. and Councilors Carl Baranzelli and Maija Biondich. Steven B. Johnson and Gary Friedlieb, two councillors, voted against the measure.
It was a far cry from discussions in September when the council was contemplating a 31% boost in the general fund charge. In September, the preliminary was ultimately fixed at 21 per cent.
Nonetheless, homeowners and taxpayers in Virginia showed up for several meetings. They made it evident that they thought the levy was far too high and that there needed to be budget cuts.
Tuesday saw that continuation as a 5.22% tax hike was being discussed. Because they were being taxed out of their houses, taxpayers stated they wanted it even lower. Cuffe said, “We gave in to the people.” He predicted that an additional $127,000 would need to be removed from the budget.
While Paulsen’s motion included a directive to municipal personnel to identify items that could be reduced, it did not mention any particular cuts.
According to Cuffe, one suggestion was to stop contributing $40,000 to the city’s {span{other post-employment benefits{/span} account—another way is reducing the councillors’ health insurance, saving approximately $147,000.
Earlier in the meeting, Paulsen showed the city’s $403,383 miscellaneous supply, other professional services, and various (across all departments) accounts. She expressed concern about the supply columns and asked how “we can squeeze $117,452 down even more to get the levy down to 3%.”
The council has declared that cuts to public works and public safety (police, fire, and EMS) are impossible, even if all areas are being examined.
The removal of curbside recycling in solid waste/recycling will result in a reduction in personnel and vehicle expenses. The general fund levy will rise from $5,296,843 in 2023 to $5,508,717 in 2024 due to a 4% tax levy boost.
The overall tax levy was $7,730,801 after deducting $1,733,718 in bonded debt (which included $1.1 million for the new public safety centre), $273,392 for the 2021 street and alley bond, $150,000 for the P&H (now Komatsu) tax reduction, and $64,974 for the economic development levy.
Virginia’s share of the proposed net tax capacity on the tax statement will be 8.011%.
The following is the tax impact on residential properties with varying estimated market values:
• A $75,000 house and an annual tax hike of $36.05
• $100,000, or $57.48 annually
• $150,000 and $101.14 annually
• $200,000, or $144.80 annually
• $250,000, or $188.46 annually
• $232.12, $300,000 a year
The following is the tax impact on commercial properties with varying estimated market values:
• $75,000 and $90.12 annually
• $150,000 and $180.24 annually
• $260.34 and $200,000 annually
• $250,000 and $340.45 annually
• $300,000 and $420.56 annually
Some residents expressed worry about the $1.1 million bonding for the Public Safety Center, but Cuffe said that the facility was primarily supported by the public when it was first proposed.
If the bonds for the Iron Trail Motors Event Center are paid off early, the city may be able to benefit in that way.
According to Cuffe, revenue from the 1% sales tax imposed to pay off the bonds is higher than anticipated. As a result, the sealants may only need to be paid off in 14 years instead of 20, and if the Legislature approves, sales tax revenue may be diverted to the Safety Center bonds.
The city will use the $800,000 increase in local government aid for Virginia in 2024 to offset the rising costs of workers’ compensation and liability insurance.
Before Tuesday’s meeting, the 2024 budget was reduced by not allocating funds for new projects, as these typically require matching city expenditures, which are not included in the reduced budget. Street projects that are currently underway will not end. Additionally, hiring is on hold, and no vacancies are filled. Two utility posts at the ITMEC, a library clerk-technology role, and a position in finance have not been filled.
Filling a second lead recreation job at the ITMEC was not endorsed as recently as last week. Not purchasing new equipment will result in additional savings, while equipment included in the 2023 capital bonding will still be bought.
Also Read:
- Hunter Biden Faces More Tax Charges During Special Counsel Probe
- Alabama’ s Tax Rebate Checks And How Can They Affect The Economy?
- Uncover the Actual Impact of a $100K Salary in California Post-Taxation!
