Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles
Not really weird at all. It just means the assessment of the tax base grew quicker than the budget. Now, if we could get the same thing to happen at the federal level..........
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_lecki
Not really, it’s good government. The taxable base increased, the budget stayed close to the same, so the tax burden was spread out over more people.
What could have happened is the taxable base increases, spending increases at the same rate on non essential stuff.
|
Opinion #3: Both of the above plus.... the size of the tax base increased and it is an election year.
The assessments did go up which means the roll back rate went down. This is neither a tax increase or a tax decrease, it is the rate at which the county collects the same amount from the same homes as they did last year.
The size of the tax base also increased - there are more homes to be taxed. The county isn't living on the same budget they had last year, they are collecting more due to having more homes (and businesses) to collect it from.
There does appear to have been some effort made to keep spending down, or at least under control.
And, this is an election year. We have already seen candidates talking about how they "lowered taxes" when that is not the case at all. The rate being used is the rollback rate which by law is neither a tax increase nor a decrease. The number is smaller but because of increased assessments, the amount the county will collect is the same. Spending was kept under control but that is not too surprising after seeing what happened in the election following the last time rates were raised.