Category Archives: Government

Next Year’s Property Revaluation in Forsyth is Going to Be a Doozy

3 Replies

From Yes!Weekly's blog post on the proposed bond referendum that would pay for streetcars in Winston-Salem among other things:

Budget challenges faced by the city include an anticipated 11-percent decrease to the property tax base with revaluation next year, the loss of federal stimulus dollars for police salaries, increased fuel costs, and plans for the city to kick in more for employee salaries and healthcare benefits.

For all of these reasons, City Manager Lee Garrity told the city council’s finance committee this evening that he is recommending that there be no bond referendum this year.

“The latest numbers for the first quarter of this calendar year are very concerning,” he said. “Sales of houses are up, as you may have read, but the price versus assessed value is down. A house in Forsyth County right now on average is selling for 11 percent below tax value. What that means for us going into the year after next with the budget is pretty significant.” (Emphasis mine).

The last time we went through a revaluation in Forsyth we were in the midst of the financial meltdown and at the time I though revaluations would not accurately reflect the true value of a property because there hadn't been time for the sales comps to have an impact on the system. Literally nothing was selling at the time so the comps were all pre-meltdown, and thus I felt they were artificially inflated. Those comps are now in the system and as the city manager pointed out this revaluation is going to show a significant drop in values, which means that tax rates will be raised significantly.

Here's the funny thing – the size of the check each property owner will be sending is likely to be close to the same amount they sent this year. That's because from the city/county's perspective they need a certain amount of revenue to make their budget (note I'm not saying whether or not the budget itself is a good thing), so when property values go up the city council or county commission will leave the rate flat or even reduce it so they can say they reduced taxes. Obviously they didn't really reduce the dollars, just the tax rate. Nice, huh? When property values go down they have to raise the tax rate, but in reality the actual tax dollars isn't much at all compared to the previous budget year. That's when you'll hear the council members and commissioners talking about how they were able to minimize the tax dollars each property owner had to send them, not the increase in the tax rate. Actually, if you read the Yes! Weekly post you'll see that they're already doing this and who can blame them?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think the best way to do this is having an annual revaluation. It's the fairest system because it more accurately reflects property values at any given time, prevents property owners from seeing 10-20% changes in their property values all at once, and makes budgeting for the city and county a little steadier. 

Unintended Consequences

Leave a reply

Most of us are familiar with the law of unintended consequences (for those of you who aren't, prohibition would be a good place to start your research) and this post at Tax.com has me wondering if all those folks fighting Obamacare in the courts might have considered the unintended consequences if they win:

The only difference between the mandate and your common tax incentive is that Congress framed the incentive as a tax penalty instead of a tax break. I recognize there might be a legal difference between the two approaches that is beyond my comprehension. But the Court, Congress, and the public should understand that economically the two approaches are exactly the same…

A tax penalty and a tax incentive have the same economic impact on affected and unaffected individuals. They have the same effect on the goals the government is trying to achieve. They have the same effect on government revenues. It is possible, then, that they have the same effect on freedom and constitutional principles.

So armchair constitutional scholars should enjoy the show. But please excuse us economists if we tune out. Perhaps too blithely, we assume the mandate will be affirmed because the nation's leading legal gurus won't want to open up a can of worms that makes all tax incentives subject to constitutional challenge. If by chance the court does strike down the mandate, by all means give us a call. It could be the beginning of the end for all those complex and inefficient tax incentives we have been complaining about all these years.

So a question for you legal scholars out there: if the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare is my wonderful deduction for mortgage interest soon to follow?

Do We Follow Florida’s Lead?

Leave a reply

Today in my email inbox I found the press release copied below. Why would anyone outside of Florida try to sell the rest of the country on an idea by saying that it started in Florida? Have they not read one of Carl Hiaasen's novels? Whatever. I know a lot of people who'd support this idea, even if the Florida legislature is involved:

For Immediate Release                                                                                   Contact: Ray Wotring

March 1, 2012                                                                                                  Phone: (703) 383-0907

Florida Legislature officially calls for Congressional term limits

Fairfax, VA – The Florida legislature today officially called on the U.S. Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment limiting Congressional terms in office. The resolution, passed by acclamation in both houses of the Florida legislature, will be sent to the president of the United States, Speaker of the U.S. House, president of the U.S. Senate and each member of the Florida Congressional delegation.

"Florida is the first state to take this step, but it will not be the last," said Philip Blumel, president of U.S. Term Limits. "With term limits polling at all-time highs and the Congress at record lows, pressure is building around the nation for Congress to take action."

Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. David Schweikert have introduced a constitutional amendment (SJR 11 and HJR 71, respectively) limiting congressional terms in the Senate and House.  While the Florida action does not specifically mention any specific legislative proposal, they are the first state to go on record in the past decade supporting a congressional term limitation constitutional amendment.  Voters overwhelmingly supported Florida's state constitutional limits on state legislators in 1992 with 77 percent support. Polling from Quinnipiac University in 2009 suggests 82 percent of Floridians continue to support term limits on public officials.

Nationally, the support for term limits remains strong with 78 percent of Americans supporting congressional term limits according to a September 2010 poll conducted for FoxNews by Public Opinion Dynamics.  Support is strong across partisan lines with 84 percent of Republicans favoring the idea while 74 percent of Democrats and 74 percent of Independents also support limiting congressional terms.

U.S. Term Limits' Blumel urged Congress to move forward with the DeMint and Schweikert amendments saying, "Passage of congressional term limits is a foundational reform needed to re-establish a sense of reality to Washington, D.C., where the entrenched political leadership no longer represents the current thinking or interests of the voters in their former home states."

Passage of the term limits constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate, and ratification by ¾ (38) of the states in order to become part of the Constitution.

The Florida resolution was introduced by State Rep. Matt Caldwell (HM83) in the Florida House and Sen. Joe Negron (SM672) in the Senate.

"The evidence is in. Term limits work," said Rep. Matt Caldwell of Lehigh Acres. "New York, Illinois and Florida have all been faced with tough decisions on how to balance their state budgets over the last few years.  Only one of these states has term limits and only one of these states has cut their budgets to match their revenues and refused to raise taxes."

"Congress is on a collision course with federal bankruptcy and our last, best hope is to bring serious and permanent change to Washington, D.C.," he said.

U.S. Term Limits is the leading national advocacy group supporting congressional term limits.

###

U.S Term Limits is a non-partisan, non-profit advocacy organization that works to promote term limits at all levels of government. For more information or to arrange an interview, please call Ray Wotring at 703-383-0907. U.S. Term Limits is a nonprofit501 (c) (4). It is located at 9900 Main Street, Suite 303 Fairfax, VA 22031 info@ustl.org

 

Click here to opt out of USTL Releases.

9900 Main Street, Suite 303
Fairfax, VA 22031

 

State and Local is Where It’s At

Leave a reply

For those of you who think all the political action is in Washington, DC I have to tell you that the real action, at least in terms of entertainment value, is in the state and local arenas. A perfect example:

Imposing Religion

Leave a reply

In reading an article that a friend sent to me I found this quote from President Kennedy:

I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

With a slight change it adequately reflects my view on the proper role of religion in American society:

I believe in a citizen whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition of citizenship.

One-World Influence in NC?

Leave a reply

Spend enough time at town council, planning board, or other various and sundry municipal meetings and you'll hear your share of strange ideas. Over in Wake County they're apparently worried that a sustainable development study is really a cover for the "one-world" folks to infiltrate the county (h/t to Ed for the link):

A work session of the Wake County Board of Commissioners on Monday turned into a debate about whether proposals to control the county's rapid growth are part of a one-world movement to deny individual freedoms.

What ignited the debate was the work session's first order of business: a task force report on "sustainability" that recommends how Wake should approach its future energy and resource needs.

Paul Coble, chairman of the Board of Commissioners, used the topic to propose a Wake County property rights commission. He said it would ward off any chance that United Nations-style notions of sustainability could infringe on individual rights in Wake…

Audience member John Markham, of Knightdale, said at the meeting that the "one-world movement" quietly infiltrates local governments to influence their actions. Markham was one of several members of the Wake County Taxpayers Association, an anti-tax group, who attended.

"They sneak around and don't go up front," Markham said. "They will not approach the federal government."

Prediction – Individual property rights will take a sudden trip to the back seat when someone tries to build a strip club next to a church (or vice versa).

Creative Legislating, Part II

Leave a reply

Last week we had the Virginia legislator who did this:

To protest a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion, Virginia State Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) on Monday attached an amendment that would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication.

The amendment ended up being a symbolic gesture as it was defeated and the original bill was passed.  This week we have this story from Indiana:

Rep. Jud McMillin, a Republican member of the Indiana General Assembly, took back his drug-testing bill after one of his helpful Democratic colleagues amended it ever so slightly.

The Huffington Post says Rep. McMillin, the sponsor of the bill advocating a pilot program for welfare applicants to be drug-tested, decided to withdraw it once his colleagues made a few tweaks.

"There was an amendment offered today that required drug testing for legislators as well and it passed, which led me to have to then withdraw the bill," he said.

His reasoning is that it's currently considered unconstitutional to require drug testing for political candidates, and he wanted to make sure the bill wouldn't be struck down because of that. However, the precedent involved was for candidates, not those already in office.

 

 

Creative Legislating

Leave a reply

Who needs reality shows when you have politics? Virginia might have the best show going right now:

To protest a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion, Virginia State Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) on Monday attached an amendment that would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication.

"We need some gender equity here," she told HuffPost. "The Virginia senate is about to pass a bill that will require a woman to have totally unnecessary medical procedure at their cost and inconvenience. If we're going to do that to women, why not do that to men?"

The Republican-controlled senate narrowly rejected the amendment Monday by a vote of 21 to 19, but passed the mandatory ultrasound bill in a voice vote. A similar bill in Texas, which physicians say has caused a "bureaucratic nightmare," is currently being challenged in court.

 

Balancing Public Safety and Liberty

Leave a reply

In preparation for the Democrats' convention the city council in Charlotte has passed a few ordinances that have some questioning if, in an effort to promote public safety, they've trampled on peoples' liberties:

People won't be allowed to carry items such as helmets and body armor; noxious substances; barricades, locks; pipes; mace or pepper spray; or other weapons.

In addition, the new ordinance prohibits people from carrying backpacks, satchels or coolers if police believe they are being used to carry weapons.

"They are frequently used to carry rocks and weapons," said CMPD Deputy Chief Harold Medlock, who is coordinating the police department's DNC response.

Medlock said during the 2008 DNC in Denver, some protesters would enter portable toilets and fill backpacks with feces, which were thrown at police.

The ACLU and others have been concerned that innocent people could be swept up in a police dragnet, such as people with bike helmets or people walking to work on Tryon Street with a briefcase. The ACLU has said the police can already stop someone if they have probable cause that a crime is taking place, and the group said it believes the ordinances are unnecessary…

(h/t to Ed Cone for the link)


 

PIPA/SOPA Explained

Leave a reply

As you might have guessed I love staying on top of current events, especially as it relates to politics, the economy and just about anything not related to Justin Bieber or Dancing with the Stars. So you can imagine my frustration when I just don't have the time to get up to speed on an issue that I'm pretty sure is important.  That's what has happened with the current PIPA/SOPA issue in Congress which is why I was so pleased to come across this explanation of the issue by Clay Shirky: