[Bill14564]

TL;DR: A lower millage rate doesn't mean you will pay less; a $200 fee increase looks better than a 25% property tax increase; the IFD would have saved between $100 and $400 on a $400K home, and; even with the increases our VPSD is a good deal.

We have read in here and other places about the smallest millage rate in history, a 7.8% decrease over last year, a rate below the rollback rate, and a fire increase of only 55 cents per day. Definitely sounds good when you put it that way. But is that the whole story or is that just the glass-half-full version?

5.19 mills is the lowest rate in history
Probably true, it's the lowest I have seen.

So I'll be paying 8% less in property tax this year?
Whoa, not so fast. The rollback rate, 5.1974, is the rate at which the county collects the same amount in property tax not counting new construction. How can that work? That works because property values increased. If the county increases my appraised value by 8% and then lowers the tax rate by 8% I pay the same amount and the county collects the same amount.

But did my property increase by 8% over last year?
We won't know until the TRIM notices come out around the end of the month. Last year my appraised value increased 30%. It may not be that high this year but I have to believe 8% would be a minimum.

So I'll be paying the same in property tax this year?
Maybe, maybe not. Those of us with the Homestead Exemption also get the Save Our Homes assessment limitation. For us, our assessments cannot increase more than 3%. I will be paying about 4.8% less in property taxes this year (about $15 for a $300K assessment). But since some of us will be paying less, others will be paying more to make up the difference.

But the millage will be lower than the rollback rate
Looking at past years, it is likely that 5.1974 will be clipped and set at 5.19. This is 0.0074 less than the rollback rate, a little over 0.1% less, about $2 on a $300K assessment.

Then the county is controlling their spending in order to work with the same amount of revenue
No, it isn't that simple. The rollback rate collects the same excluding new construction. There was new construction. The anticipated property tax revenue increased from $95M last year to $101M this year, a 6% increase.

So I'm paying about the same and the county is making due with just a 6% increase in revenue
No, the county collects more than that. This thread started because of an increase in the fire protection fee. That money goes into the general fund too. That revenue increased from $9M last year to $35M this year, a 290% increase. Between the fire protection fee and property taxes, the county collected $104M from the annual tax bill last year. This year they anticipate collecting $136M, a 31% increase. Bottom line, revenue for the general fund is expected to increase from $187M to $214M or a 14% increase.

But the additional $200 was necessary to pay for the new EMS service.
Not according to the study that was used to determine the $323.64 number. The Benesch study went to the trouble of calculating the amount of resources spent on fire protection and the amount of resources spent on EMS. They then used only the fire protection numbers to calculate the $323.64. That isn't to say that some EMS overhead didn't make its way into that number but the majority of the EMS costs are excluded.

Then the additional $200 was necessary because the cost of fire protection increased
Fire protection costs probably did increase over last year but not by 161%! The portion of the fire protection costs that were not covered by the $124 fee came out of the general fund (our property taxes) last year. This year that additional amount has been moved to the non-Ad-Valorem fee.

Then what was the reason for the $200 increase?
In my mind there are two. One, to better represent the true cost of fire protection. The $124 number had not been adjusted in quite some time so a recalculation was needed. $323.64 appears to be closer to the true cost of fire protection. Two, and in my mind this is the more significant, to avoid a 20% to 25% increase in the property tax millage rate. Fire and EMS were going to cost the same next year whether the $124 was increased or not. If it was not increased then the money would have had to come from property taxes. Collecting this from property taxes would have required about a 25% increase in the millage rate. In the past a 25% increase has been detrimental to the careers of the Commissioners who voted for it. A $200 increase, only 55 cents per day, was justifiable and much safer.

But at least we're paying less than we would have with the IFD
Absolutely not! Next year we will be paying $324 plus 1.3 mills for fire protection. For a home with a $400K assessment this comes to $844. Under the IFD the same home would have paid between $430 and $720 (maximum allowed by the IFD law). The IFD would have saved this home at least $100 and might have saved up to $400.

The amount I pay in property tax is fine with me. I believe it might have now increased to the same amount I was paying before I moved but the fire protection is better and I no longer pay state income tax. At $324 the fire protection cost seems reasonable and while I've not had to make use of it, everything I hear says the service is top notch. The glass is definitely at least half full.

Don't try to mislead me by pointing to the small numbers and implying it is a decrease when it is actually an increase. The county is controlling its spending to just a 14% increase over last year. That might be good by some standards but I didn't see a 14% increase in my income over last year. It looks like my payment to the county will increase about 7% which isn't too bad. I still like what I'm getting but don't talk as though I'm paying less when I can see that I'm paying more.
EDIT(1): It was pointed out that the county has grown somewhat in the last year. Part of the 14% is for the additional resources to support the additional roads, homes, and people.


Please, if any of this is incorrect, let me know so I can fix it.