Loading...
04-07-1982 MinutesApril 7, 1982 Mr. E. Merlin O~Neill~ Sr., Chairman Mro. Joan Girone, Vice ChairMan Mr. ¢. L. Bookman Mr. I~arry ~, D~niel ~r, R. Garland Dodd ~. Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Mr. Steve ~i~as, County Attorney called the meeting to order at th~ Courthouse at {EST). Mr. Dedd gave the invocation. On motion of tr. Dodd~ seconded by Mr. Bookman~ the Board appointed Mr. John R. Grundy to the Men%al Heal,h/Mental ~etardation Cabin, unity Services ~car~ effectiv~ immediately and whose term will expire cn December 31, 19~4. ~r. O~Neill stated the purpose of the meeting was to consider adoption of the %ax l~vy for qbe various elasse~ of property in the County. Mr. Bedrick ~tated that the public hearing~ held as required by law and that 9ince the Board would be adopting the~e levies by ~rdinane~, it was requested thaq ~he BOard adopt th~ ordinanue on an emergency he,is with adventi~inq for a public hearing to be set for a later ~ate. ~r. Daniel inquired if the advertising were proper for the pb3ullc hearings on March 31, 1982. Mr. ~icas stated all hearing~ were held properly. Mr. ~edrick read the proposed ordinance. Mr. O'Neill inquired if anyon~ wished to address the ordinance. Mr. John Smith inquired what the tax rate would be on construction eguipment. Mr. Hedrlck stated the same a~ exiets today which ia $3.60/$100 assessed value. Mr. Smith inquired if thim were on all tcol~ such as bulldozers. Mr. Hedrick stated Yes. Mr. Smith insuired what was the tax on manufacturing mining equipment. Mr. ~edrick stated that was covered under the Machinery ~nd Tools portion ce the ©rdine~ce bu: it would be $1.0g/$100 assessed value end would be determined by the Commissioner of R~venue. Ur. };edriek stated ~urther that the mtaff is currently reviewing all aspects of the tax ~trueture in the County. He s~ated this report would not affect amy rates this year, but ii the Board made ch~nqes, they could affect the ~r. Dodd stated that he was not up,et with the County kdminietrator retarding the tax rate a~ al! Board men, ers gave him guidelfne~ in which to follow which was to maintain the current tsx rate of $.98 on real property but h~ stated hs has ~ever seen the real estate situation in. the doldrums a~ it is today, He stated that the Board may have been wrong in requesting the maintenance of the S.98 ta× rate as the Board may situation to be as bad as it is. He stated next year may be worse and it might be wiss for the Soard to look at whet'will be done closer, ke stated that the real @state market is unreal at this time and the ~oard is bunping the limits of the real taxes. ~e stated he felt there wa~ some excess in the budget. Mr. O~Neill stated all are awar~ that the projections for next year will be worse. He inquired where Mr. Dodd felt there was exces~ in the budget. Hr, Dodd stated the contingency COuld reduced from $500,000 to perhaps $250,0~ an~ thst there are po~itions balng added for which hs did not a~ree which involved real dollars. ~r. Daniel inquired what th~ cost of 10 positions would be. Mr. ~edrick stated app~oximate!y $350,080. Mr. Denis2 stated that the positions being added were only for public areas and he felt a $.01 reduction in the tax ~ate was not worth~ keeping 10 men from being hired in that category. He stated tha~ the Board needed to decide whether or not to continue ~sential services in ~D urban atmosphere, one of which is 9ubllc safety. ~e stated that the new positions are for ~ire and police. Me stated he understood the hardship of the economy but there are certain things that taxpayers expect. Mr. Bookman statud he appreciated the comment~ by ~r. Dodd, and that private businesses, industries, e~¢. are laving off shutting down~ and maybe tko County should consider a four day work w~ek for its employees except for public safety. ~r. Daniel stated that corporations are soliciting input from e~ptoyee~ as to how they can do their job at a less cost and this could be i~plement~d at the County. Mr. ~edrick stated that the County has begun steps such as the organizational structure to insur~ go~d supervision, that the Board has ~pproved the performance system, etc. He s~a~ed 70-80% of the co~t of government is in personnel es it is e service organization. He stated ~h~t he felt ~he County was in financial shape, that assessments hav~ gone up, but jurisdictions. He stated that the Board will h~ livins within ?.7~ and that the eCOnomic factors were considered in the last hav~ a restaurant tax nor a u~ilit¥ tax. He stated that the rather see 1~0~0 employees working 4 day work week~ than laying cfr 380 should economic times become worse. He stated he felt Mr. Dedd s~ated the recovery was supposed to be this spring but nOW it may be next spring. ~e state~ the ballga~e had changed and he would like tho Board to consider $.97 as the tax rate on Mr. Hedrick stated the increases are for personnel in public stated the public npproved the bond issues for fire stations, for parks and recreation and for Schools. ~ stated the County had gone to a self-insurance program in a cost saving ~ffort but if there should be a l~rge claim, it could hurt the c~ntingency account. He ~tated he felt this budget was conservative. ~lr. Dodd stated that he had received comolaints r~garding the Sheriff's Departmen~ stopping vehicles ekd ie~uJnc summons and inquired why two Departments were doing the same ]ob. It was on adopted on an emerqsnc~ basis witk a Public Hearing scheduled fs May 26, 1952 at 10:00 a.m.: An Ordinance to Establish the Annual Tau Levy of Chesterfield Be Tt Ordained By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield that for the year beginning on the first day of January, 1982, and ending on the thir~y-flrst day of December, I982, the taxes on property in all the Magisterial Districts of the COunty of Chesterfield shall be as Sec. 1. Rmal Property and Mobile ~omus On tracts of land, 1ot~ or improvements thmr~on and on mobile hom~s the ta~ shall be $0.97 on ~very $100 of the assessed value thereof. On automobiles, %railers, boats, boat trailers, airplanes, other motor vehiele~: and on tangible personal property or held iD connection witk any mining, manufacturing or other bu~iness~ trade, occupation or profession, including ~urnishings, furniture and appliances in rental units, the tax shall be $3.S0 on ~very $100 of the a~mes~d value thereof. $~c. 3. Public Servioe Corporation Property {a) On that portion of the real estate and tancible personal property of public service co,potations which has beea equalized as provided in sec, 5~=512.1 o~ the Code of Virginia, as amended, the tax skull b~ $0.97 On every of the assessed value thereo~ determined by the State Corporation Commission. (b) On that portion of th~ real ~state and tangible personal property o~ public service corporation~ which has not been equalized as provided in Sec. 5~-512.~ of the Code of Virginia, as amehded, the tax shall be $3.~ on every $100 of ~$$es~ed value thereof d~termined by the State Corporation Conu~ission. (0) The foregoing subsections to th~ contrary notwithstanding, on automobiles and trucks belonging to suc p~blic service c~rporations the tax shall be $3.60 on every Si00 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 4. Machinery and Too~s. On machinery and tools used in a manufacturing or minin~ business the tax shall be $1.O0 on every SlOe assessed valu, thereof. There was no second to the motion. M~c. O'Neill stated there had been several work sessions and he felt this was net %h~ lime to bring up a reduction in the rat~. ~e stated that he had under,toed when the new ~ire stations were bain9 cen$~ered~ that the paid men would be transferred from th. other ~ta~iun$ to the new ones but no one remembered that which would have saved considerable money. He stated that there was a large drainag~ pr©bl~ as well as a road problem in %he Sermuda District which woul~ have to be supplemented from the Continency account which would not allow much for the rem~iniug ar~as of ~h, County if it were reduced to ~250,08~. He ~tated that the sym~olio reduction by $,01 is not the answer. ~e stated it there ~re specific cuts in services or personnel that could be disnugged there was still time, but to reduce the rate at thc last minute without addressing specific issue~ was not pzoper. Mrs. ~irene stated this had bssn the best budget preces~ since she has bc~n on thc Beard and staff responded to the new method. She s~ate~ that she £~lt this was a responsive and een~ervativs bn~et. She stated that $5,000,000 for schools, 3~ men for the fire department and 8 for the police ic planned. She stated to keep the $.9S ~at~ would be the better Dart of wisdom and that positions had been cut where the Board felt necessary_ Bookman stated he was n~t ~ainsh the $.9~ tax rate, but that th~ Board is dee%ina with projections of ~ales tax, ehc. which may not be as high as anticipated. ~e stated that the ~ar~ will faced with cuts if projection~ are not as anticipated. ~e stated ha would like to hear ~rom the public where the cuts should ~e--such ac reduction in cervices or to go to a ~ day work week. Mr. Dedd £nquire~ if the Board decided on the budget at this %im~_ Ali men, ers agreed they had not at this point. Mr. stated he ~elt more money that g.01 on the tax rat~ is wasted, for example, he had seen 10 County vehicles 4n Chesta~ this date. Mr. O'Neill aqa%n stated this was the wronq time tn consider reducing the tax rate. }{rs. Girone stated that there exists a strong Central Accounting Department, Data Processing Department and Budget Department which nh~ felt could monitor the f~nanioal situations sad the Beard could make changes mid-year if ~crranted. Mr. Hedrick mtate~ for example, %his year the County absorbed $700,000 in unexpected expense~ Because there was no second~ Mr. Dodd ~i~hdrew his motion. M~. Danlsl sta~ed that he felt monitoring the finances wa~ needed. ~e stated that hc fel~ this di~eussion was keaithy and that should the Board need to chan~e its course in the year ahead~ it can be On motion of the Board, the following resQlution was adopted on an emergency basis an~ the da~e of May 26, 1982, at 10:00 was s~h fo~ the Pub%lc ~earin~: B~ It Ordained by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Ch~mt~rfield that for =he yeaz beginning on the first day of January~ 1982, end ending on thc thirty-first day of December, 1982, the taxes on property in all th~ ~agisterial Districts of the County of Chesterfield ~hall be ag fellows: Soc. 1. Real Pwoperty and b~bils ~omes On trach~ Of land, lots or improvements %hereon and on mobil~ homes the =ax shall be $D.98 on uverv $10Q Of the Sec. 2. Personal Pr©p~xtv On automobiles, trail~r¥~ boats, bum: tre~Iar~ airplanes, other motor vehicles: and on tangiblm personal property used fu~nishings~ furniture and appliances in rental units, the thereof. ~Z-126 Sec, 3, Publi0 Service Corporation Property (a} On that portion of the real estate and tangible personal property of public service corDoration~ which has been equalized n~ provided in Sec. 58-512.I of the Code of Virginia~ as amended, the tax ~hall be S0.98 On every of the a~sed value thereof determined by the State Cospora~ion Commission+ (b) On that portion of the real estate and tangible personal property of publis service corporations which not been equalized as provided in Sec. 5S-5t2.1 ef the Code of Virginia, as amended, the tax shall be $3.20 on every $100 of assessed value thereof determiue~ by the State Corporation Co~ission. {c) The foregoing subsections to the contrary notwithstanding, on automobiles and trucks b~longing to ~uch public service corporations the tax shall be $3.60 on every $100 of assessed Yalu~ thereof. Sec. 4. ~ach~nery and Tools. On machinery and tools u~ed in a manufaeturlng or ninlng business the Lax shall be el.00 on every $100 a~s~seed value thereof. Board being polled was a~ fellows: O'Neill - Aye ~irone - Aye Bookman - Aye Daniel - Aye Dodd - Aye ~gain in depth. Girone commented that the constituents at her monthly ~¢eting this month eoul~ ~ifferentiate between asseSSmcnt~ and rate which she felt ~as good but they were concerned about Ir. O'Neill stated he had received complaints from ~hs ~arrowq~ta ~rea in that 17 boys are not being all~wed to play b~ll by CBC. [e stated that if CBC is going to schedule the fieldg, the~e boys ~hould be allowed to play. Ke requested the COunty Administr~tor :hie ~a~ter an~ that he will bo prepared to make a motion to Iroup and ~uch problems can be worked out if all cooperate. ,here being no further business, it was on motion of ~ir. Bookman, ;cconded by ~r. Dodd, resolved that the Board adjourned at ll~O0 ~.m. until t1:30 a_m~ OD ~pril 13, 1982. lichard L. Hedrick Iounhy A~minis%rator E. Motrin O'Neill, Sr~~ ~ ' Chairman