2011 Paulding County Budget

[tmilanese]

It's out. Sock-puppets have at it! :)

 

http://paulding.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=440

[Georgia Dawg]

Too bad our planners didn't work toward a better vision like the folks down in the Panama City did with their new airport. It would have great to actually have someone like SouthWest airlines serving our airport. THAT, would have brought business to Paulding County.

[FreeBird]

The reds in that area complained about some helicopters wanting to use the airport. What do you think whey would say with a 717 landing?

[Cabe]

I'd love to have Surepip show me where the legal fees he claims the county has spent are located in that budget. I only saw one entry and it was minimal for last year.

[MarkPalm]

Since I'm not a PC citizen, is okay for me to point out the two typos on page two under the accomplishments for 2010?

[FreeBird]

I'm still looking for that new library in the NE corner of the county that is "nearing completion?"

[feelip]

The reds in that area complained about some helicopters wanting to use the airport. What do you think whey would say with a 717 landing?

 

 

I would say they wouldn't have to complain very long since PUJ is 5,500 feet and a 717 requires 7,600 feet. About one landing 2,100 feet into the woods should be about all it takes.

 

This airport was designed for twin turbos. Can't imagine why.

 

Since I'm not a PC citizen, is okay for me to point out the two typos on page two under the accomplishments for 2010?

 

 

Point all you dare, but be ready to hear about running for office if you think you can do any better.

[Sugail]

I'm still looking for that new library in the NE corner of the county that is "nearing completion?"

Is that the one by the new fire station on Harmony Grove Church Rd.?

[FreeBird]

Is that the one by the new fire station on Harmony Grove Church Rd.?

 

 

right - the library nearing completion is the dirt pile next to station 11

[mei lan]

You can't visualize a library in that dirt pile? I don't know what that says about you.

[The Sound Guy]

Well, Dang.

 

Not much to complain about is there?

 

Mr. Austin is acting like a real conservative.

 

I couldn't have blamed him for raising the millage rate this year enough to at least keep the budget revenue neutral. It really wouldn't have been a tax increase since we wouldn't be paying any more in $$$ than we are now.

 

Instead, he gives us another property tax cut. Yikes! Am I dreaming?

 

I can only hope that he will continue in this way as long as possible, and that the voters that are electing new commissioners will give him someone he can work with.

 

WTG David!

 

PS: "Watson Government Complex"? I assume that is the official name of the County Government Center on 278. Who was it named after? I can't find that on line.

 

PPS: FreeBird - I'm with you. If that pile of dirt is a Library that is "Nearing Completion" I'm worried they may have cut that contract just a little too far.

[MarkPalm]

Point all you dare, but be ready to hear about running for office if you think you can do any better.

 

Too bad... they can tell me all they want. I don't live in Paulding. I like David Austin and I'm just enough of an ass to point out a misspelling.

[NumberCruncher]

all i read was 'sockpuppets' and 'ass' i like this thread.

[bellaprincess]

all i read was 'sockpuppets' and 'ass' i like this thread.

 

:rofl: I was looking for the "like" button on here again!

 

(We need that for your posts!)

[Georgia Dawg]

I wonder if it's been long enough for someone on David Austin's team to take down his election campaign sign at the corner of Cleburne Parkway and Rosedale...

[JohnnyJ]

...

 

PS: "Watson Government Complex"? I assume that is the official name of the County Government Center on 278. Who was it named after? I can't find that on line.

 

...

 

Watson was the name of the property owner that sold to the county. I believe he was an relative of the Tax Commisioner Watson.

[tmilanese]

Well, Dang.

 

Not much to complain about is there?

 

Mr. Austin is acting like a real conservative.

 

I couldn't have blamed him for raising the millage rate this year enough to at least keep the budget revenue neutral. It really wouldn't have been a tax increase since we wouldn't be paying any more in $$$ than we are now.

 

Instead, he gives us another property tax cut. Yikes! Am I dreaming?

 

I can only hope that he will continue in this way as long as possible, and that the voters that are electing new commissioners will give him someone he can work with.

 

WTG David!

 

PS: "Watson Government Complex"? I assume that is the official name of the County Government Center on 278. Who was it named after? I can't find that on line.

 

PPS: FreeBird - I'm with you. If that pile of dirt is a Library that is "Nearing Completion" I'm worried they may have cut that contract just a little too far.

 

Explain the property tax cut you see in this budget?

[cherokeewoman]

Sound Guy - I agree with GOP rules, I read this, side way reading on some, but where did the millage rate non increase show up? Thankful if it did, but did not see it there.

[thedeerslayer]

Burnt Hickory park was supposed to have been complete by fall of 2009

[FreeBird]

deerslayer, that date was after the "complete in 2008" date.....

[thedeerslayer]

deerslayer, that date was after the "complete in 2008" date.....

Wish they would hurry.

 

I heard Aiken has taken over the grading and that the roads were off, bad.

[The Sound Guy]

Sound Guy - I agree with GOP rules, I read this, side way reading on some, but where did the millage rate non increase show up? Thankful if it did, but did not see it there.

 

Explain the property tax cut you see in this budget?

 

I'm sure you are aware that property tax calculations use two factors, the tax base and the millage rate.

 

David states in the summary:

 

Our revenues are decreasing for the 2nd year in a row due to a continued decrease in property values. <snip> This budget does not propose an increase to the millage rate...

 

If the sum total of the property values within the county goes down, but the millage rate stays the same, then the total taxes paid by the owners of the county goes down, thus, a tax reduction. My house was devalued last year and since the millage was the same, my county taxes went down. (The increase in STATE taxes through the removal of the state property tax credit pretty much canceled out the reduction, but that's another subject.)

 

It's the inverse of the effect that we've already seen in the 'good times' where as the tax base in the county goes up, mainly the property value increases, and if the millage rate stayed the same, the total taxes paid would go up. For years in the past, this would be a "hidden" tax increase that produced a great bounty for the county government.

 

However, as I recall, the state passed a law that said that if the property tax digest change would cause an increase in the taxes collected, the counties either had to reduce their millage rate to keep it revenue neutral, or have announcements and public meetings to discuss the increases. Those meetings are unpopular, so usually, the millage rate would be cut, while the county was actually still collecting the same amount of tax money.

 

While I've been a homeowner in Paulding, when this happened, our commissioners would be out and about crowing about their "tax rate reductions" and cheered by people who don't understand how it the system works, all the while my total $$$$ paid for property went up by $1000 a year or so over six years. Some reduction. (We won't even discuss sneaky tactics like getting a 2 mil fire tax passed and then dumping the fire department budget from the general fund the next year, but keeping the same millage rate, giving the county budget a 2 mil increase without a public meeting.)

 

Anyway, an interesting side affect of this process in the good times was reducing the taxes for any major landowner with property (10+ acres) in a tax covenant. These covenants fix the value of the property for a fixed time, 10 - 20 years as long as they don't develop it, so as the millage rate goes down, they pay lower taxes, while the homeowners and businesses that have their values increase actually pay more taxes to make up for the revenue the other landowners are not paying. Remember, it's *total* revenue neutral. Individuals can still get increases.

 

I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income. This year, he notes they are using some of the reserve to make up the difference. Either he is hoping that the economy will recover some this year and his projections will be low or he'd rather increase the millage rate on a non-election year. Not sure which.

 

In either case, I don't see a lot in the budget that can be cut. DOT needs all the cash they can get, the harsh winter and now heavy rains have most of the roads I drive on in the county in bad shape. The other county departments also seem pretty trim. If the economy does not recover, then I figure we'll have to have a rate increase next year to at least keep the taxes revenue neutral.

[tmilanese]

I'm sure you are aware that property tax calculations use two factors, the tax base and the millage rate.

 

David states in the summary:

 

 

 

If the sum total of the property values within the county goes down, but the millage rate stays the same, then the total taxes paid by the owners of the county goes down, thus, a tax reduction. My house was devalued last year and since the millage was the same, my county taxes went down. (The increase in STATE taxes through the removal of the state property tax credit pretty much canceled out the reduction, but that's another subject.)

 

It's the inverse of the effect that we've already seen in the 'good times' where as the tax base in the county goes up, mainly the property value increases, and if the millage rate stayed the same, the total taxes paid would go up. For years in the past, this would be a "hidden" tax increase that produced a great bounty for the county government.

 

However, as I recall, the state passed a law that said that if the property tax digest change would cause an increase in the taxes collected, the counties either had to reduce their millage rate to keep it revenue neutral, or have announcements and public meetings to discuss the increases. Those meetings are unpopular, so usually, the millage rate would be cut, while the county was actually still collecting the same amount of tax money.

 

While I've been a homeowner in Paulding, when this happened, our commissioners would be out and about crowing about their "tax rate reductions" and cheered by people who don't understand how it the system works, all the while my total $$$$ paid for property went up by $1000 a year or so over six years. Some reduction. (We won't even discuss sneaky tactics like getting a 2 mil fire tax passed and then dumping the fire department budget from the general fund the next year, but keeping the same millage rate, giving the county budget a 2 mil increase without a public meeting.)

 

Anyway, an interesting side affect of this process in the good times was reducing the taxes for any major landowner with property (10+ acres) in a tax covenant. These covenants fix the value of the property for a fixed time, 10 - 20 years as long as they don't develop it, so as the millage rate goes down, they pay lower taxes, while the homeowners and businesses that have their values increase actually pay more taxes to make up for the revenue the other landowners are not paying. Remember, it's *total* revenue neutral. Individuals can still get increases.

 

I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income. This year, he notes they are using some of the reserve to make up the difference. Either he is hoping that the economy will recover some this year and his projections will be low or he'd rather increase the millage rate on a non-election year. Not sure which.

 

In either case, I don't see a lot in the budget that can be cut. DOT needs all the cash they can get, the harsh winter and now heavy rains have most of the roads I drive on in the county in bad shape. The other county departments also seem pretty trim. If the economy does not recover, then I figure we'll have to have a rate increase next year to at least keep the taxes revenue neutral.

 

"I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income" - partially correct but they also raised the mill-rate from 6.5 to 6.65 ; also, I don't believe the majority of folks got new assessments done this year so the mill-rate staying the same will not result in a tax-cut for them. Am I wrong?

[The Sound Guy]

"I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income" - partially correct but they also raised the mill-rate from 6.5 to 6.65 ; also, I don't believe the majority of folks got new assessments done this year so the mill-rate staying the same will not result in a tax-cut for them. Am I wrong?

 

That's right. I forgot he did have a small rate increase in that budget. Still he cut the total budget by quite a bit as I recall, no small feat.

 

You are correct on the latter statement also. Anyone not getting a decrease in their assessment will not see a decrease in taxes. However, someone must be getting assessment decreases or there would not be a digest drop. I also have had my total property taxes increase in years past where there was a rate decrease because my value was raised more than the rate decrease. Individuals may have increases or decreases, but on a county wide level, the total taxes collected will drop if David's statements turn out to be correct.

 

As far as re-assessments, even if you didn't request one, they still do them. It's still a little early to get our assessment notices from the county for 2010. I dug out last years, it's dated June 15th, 2009, so I suspect we should start seeing them in the next few weeks and find out who got the values reduced. I didn't request a re-assessment last year, the county reduced it on their own.

[tmilanese]

That's right. I forgot he did have a small rate increase in that budget. Still he cut the total budget by quite a bit as I recall, no small feat.

 

You are correct on the latter statement also. Anyone not getting a decrease in their assessment will not see a decrease in taxes. However, someone must be getting assessment decreases or there would not be a digest drop. I also have had my total property taxes increase in years past where there was a rate decrease because my value was raised more than the rate decrease. Individuals may have increases or decreases, but on a county wide level, the total taxes collected will drop if David's statements turn out to be correct.

 

As far as re-assessments, even if you didn't request one, they still do them. It's still a little early to get our assessment notices from the county for 2010. I dug out last years, it's dated June 15th, 2009, so I suspect we should start seeing them in the next few weeks and find out who got the values reduced. I didn't request a re-assessment last year, the county reduced it on their own.

 

Actually, I think I remember Tabitha telling me about a timing issue when it comes to assessments and taxes. I think your assessment from last June 15th, 2009 may actually be the one that will be used for your tax bill this fall. Not sure, I'm waiting on phone call to confirm.

[The Sound Guy]

Actually, I think I remember Tabitha telling me about a timing issue when it comes to assessments and taxes. I think your assessment from last June 15th, 2009 may actually be the one that will be used for your tax bill this fall. Not sure, I'm waiting on phone call to confirm.

 

I just looked at my 2009 Tax Bill (Due Nov, 2009) and it used the new value that I got in June. If it's not changed this year, it will be used again for the 2010 taxes.

[WHITEY]

I'm sure you are aware that property tax calculations use two factors, the tax base and the millage rate.

 

David states in the summary:

 

 

 

If the sum total of the property values within the county goes down, but the millage rate stays the same, then the total taxes paid by the owners of the county goes down, thus, a tax reduction. My house was devalued last year and since the millage was the same, my county taxes went down. (The increase in STATE taxes through the removal of the state property tax credit pretty much canceled out the reduction, but that's another subject.)

 

It's the inverse of the effect that we've already seen in the 'good times' where as the tax base in the county goes up, mainly the property value increases, and if the millage rate stayed the same, the total taxes paid would go up. For years in the past, this would be a "hidden" tax increase that produced a great bounty for the county government.

 

However, as I recall, the state passed a law that said that if the property tax digest change would cause an increase in the taxes collected, the counties either had to reduce their millage rate to keep it revenue neutral, or have announcements and public meetings to discuss the increases. Those meetings are unpopular, so usually, the millage rate would be cut, while the county was actually still collecting the same amount of tax money.

 

While I've been a homeowner in Paulding, when this happened, our commissioners would be out and about crowing about their "tax rate reductions" and cheered by people who don't understand how it the system works, all the while my total $$$$ paid for property went up by $1000 a year or so over six years. Some reduction. (We won't even discuss sneaky tactics like getting a 2 mil fire tax passed and then dumping the fire department budget from the general fund the next year, but keeping the same millage rate, giving the county budget a 2 mil increase without a public meeting.)

 

Anyway, an interesting side affect of this process in the good times was reducing the taxes for any major landowner with property (10+ acres) in a tax covenant. These covenants fix the value of the property for a fixed time, 10 - 20 years as long as they don't develop it, so as the millage rate goes down, they pay lower taxes, while the homeowners and businesses that have their values increase actually pay more taxes to make up for the revenue the other landowners are not paying. Remember, it's *total* revenue neutral. Individuals can still get increases.

 

I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income. This year, he notes they are using some of the reserve to make up the difference. Either he is hoping that the economy will recover some this year and his projections will be low or he'd rather increase the millage rate on a non-election year. Not sure which.

 

In either case, I don't see a lot in the budget that can be cut. DOT needs all the cash they can get, the harsh winter and now heavy rains have most of the roads I drive on in the county in bad shape. The other county departments also seem pretty trim. If the economy does not recover, then I figure we'll have to have a rate increase next year to at least keep the taxes revenue neutral.

 

 

Sound Guy this is an excellent post that pretty well sums up the budget process and the taxing process.

 

For too long the citizens of this County have been hoodwinked into thinking they were actually getting a tax cut, Only to discover when they got their tax bill they were actually paying more taxes soley based on higher property assessments.

 

 

Looking at the proposed budget Chairman Austin Stated that the tax revenue will be down by Appox. $6.7 million if I read this correctely.

 

This means to me that $6.7 million dollars will stay in the local economy, And in the pockets of the property owners of Paulding County.

 

This is unheard of in Paulding County for at least the past ten years, And probably beyond that.

It appears to me that his adminstration is in fact working for us, The tax payers.

 

Chairman Austin, Is to be comended for a Balanced budget with no Millage rate increase during these recessionary times.

 

As An added note I heard that the School Board was also not proposing a tax increase this year, If this proves to be true Kudos to the School Board for not raising taxes this year also.

 

It is simply amazing what a few changes in adminstrations Both Commissioner's and School Board can do for the citizens of this county.

[vslade]

Well, Dang.

 

Not much to complain about is there?

 

Mr. Austin is acting like a real conservative.

 

I couldn't have blamed him for raising the millage rate this year enough to at least keep the budget revenue neutral. It really wouldn't have been a tax increase since we wouldn't be paying any more in $$$ than we are now.

 

Instead, he gives us another property tax cut. Yikes! Am I dreaming?

 

I can only hope that he will continue in this way as long as possible, and that the voters that are electing new commissioners will give him someone he can work with.

 

WTG David!

 

PS: "Watson Government Complex"? I assume that is the official name of the County Government Center on 278. Who was it named after? I can't find that on line.

 

PPS: FreeBird - I'm with you. If that pile of dirt is a Library that is "Nearing Completion" I'm worried they may have cut that contract just a little too far.

It was named for the Watson Family that the land was purchased from. This was part of the deal for them to sell

the land to the county.

[lotstodo]

"I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income" - partially correct but they also raised the mill-rate from 6.5 to 6.65 ; also, I don't believe the majority of folks got new assessments done this year so the mill-rate staying the same will not result in a tax-cut for them. Am I wrong?

Right. It would be a reduction in revenue for the county in spite of a millage rate increase. This is due to tax delinquencies and a reduction in property values. The tax paid by the individual homeowner would be increased or decreased based upon their assessment and the application of the millage rate increase. The jist of it is that the county is getting along with less revenue, but the individual homeowner isn't necessarily paying less tax.

 

I'm glad to see some semblance of fiscal responsibility on the part of the BOC this year. I know that this budget wasn't easy to hammer out.

[WHITEY]

"I note that last year, David cut the budget to fit the reduced income" - partially correct but they also raised the mill-rate from 6.5 to 6.65 ; also, I don't believe the majority of folks got new assessments done this year so the mill-rate staying the same will not result in a tax-cut for them. Am I wrong?

Wow 0.15 Increase in the M&O rate!!!!

 

I am sure you were marching around the State Capital Last year and again this year when the Republican controlled Legislature failed to fund the HTR and thereby cost every property owner between $150 and $200 in property taxes last year and this year.

 

And then took those dollars and gave Delta and KIA And other large Corporations hundreds of millions in tax breaks and incentives

 

I do not understand your logic on this fraction of a mil tax increase, And the previous Adminstration raised our taxes by hundreds of dollars each year, And you said nothing at the commissioners meetings WTH?????????

[WHITEY]

Right. It would be a reduction in revenue for the county in spite of a millage rate increase. This is due to tax delinquencies and a reduction in property values. The tax paid by the individual homeowner would be increased or decreased based upon their assessment and the application of the millage rate increase. The jist of it is that the county is getting along with less revenue, but the individual homeowner isn't necessarily paying less tax.

 

I'm glad to see some semblance of fiscal responsibility on the part of the BOC this year. I know that this budget wasn't easy to hammer out.

LTD I disagree with you on this post If a home was assessed at $200,000 in 2008 And taxed at 6.5 mil and was reassed at $190,000 in 2009 and taxed at 6.65 mil the taxes would be less, Same house was assessed at $190,000 in 2010 Taxes would still be less that 2008 for the M&O

 

Yes the taxes would be more in 2009 and 2010 for two reasons The bond had to be paid for the Courthouse Which the taxpayers had no vote And the Greenspace Bond which the voters elected to be taxed for, Both of whuch were passed in the previous adminstration and not taxed for as provided for in the resolutions psssed by the previous adminstration

 

And the HTR was not funded both years by the legislature

[surepip]

I'd love to have Surepip show me where the legal fees he claims the county has spent are located in that budget. I only saw one entry and it was minimal for last year.

 

You will have to ask the BOC or Tabitha Pollard how they code the Holland & Knight invoices paid. I only did an open records request for what had been paid directly for our case/suits. And Tabitha provided the numbers each time I requested.

 

As of January 2009 when David Austin took his chairman seat the total spent the prior 2-1/2 years under Shearin in our case was $749,000+.

 

As of January 2010, the total was over $803,000 [so about $54,000 for 2009].

 

As of the end of March 2010, the total was over $1,000,000 [million]. That was the figure used in the oral argument hearings in court on March 17.

 

I don't believe they actually "budget" those numbers.

They just pay the bills when they come in and may be under other professional fees, with the actual legal fee heading going to what is paid to Talley, Richardson, and Cable for providing Jason Phillips and others as county attorneys.

 

 

I guess it may be time to do another open records request and get a current figure.

[tmilanese]

Wow 0.15 Increase in the M&O rate!!!!

 

I am sure you were marching around the State Capital Last year and again this year when the Republican controlled Legislature failed to fund the HTR and thereby cost every property owner between $150 and $200 in property taxes last year and this year.

 

And then took those dollars and gave Delta and KIA And other large Corporations hundreds of millions in tax breaks and incentives

 

I do not understand your logic on this fraction of a mil tax increase, And the previous Adminstration raised our taxes by hundreds of dollars each year, And you said nothing at the commissioners meetings WTH?????????

 

Dude, take a pill. I just pointed out that the entire short-fall on revenue was not made up by cutting the budget. As for the state tax relief fund, I don't see the point of it. If the state wants to give me money back then just take less on my state income tax. I've never like the whole take from me with the left hand and give back a portion with the right hand and expect me to jump up and down in glee. I won't address the anti-capitalist rant about Delta and KIA. As for the previous administration, I was new to the county and not informed enough to what was going on.

[tmilanese]

Sound Guy this is an excellent post that pretty well sums up the budget process and the taxing process.

 

For too long the citizens of this County have been hoodwinked into thinking they were actually getting a tax cut, Only to discover when they got their tax bill they were actually paying more taxes soley based on higher property assessments.

 

 

Looking at the proposed budget Chairman Austin Stated that the tax revenue will be down by Appox. $6.7 million if I read this correctely.

 

This means to me that $6.7 million dollars will stay in the local economy, And in the pockets of the property owners of Paulding County.

 

This is unheard of in Paulding County for at least the past ten years, And probably beyond that.

It appears to me that his adminstration is in fact working for us, The tax payers.

 

Chairman Austin, Is to be comended for a Balanced budget with no Millage rate increase during these recessionary times.

 

As An added note I heard that the School Board was also not proposing a tax increase this year, If this proves to be true Kudos to the School Board for not raising taxes this year also.

 

It is simply amazing what a few changes in adminstrations Both Commissioner's and School Board can do for the citizens of this county.

 

Wouldn't the mill-rate on the bond need to go up again if the tax digest decreased again?

[WHITEY]

Wouldn't the mill-rate on the bond need to go up again if the tax digest decreased again?

Not necessarily if there were savings in other areas, I believe the proposed budget shows that some of the previous bonds (reservoir) were renegotiated at a lower rate, therefore the current millage was sufficient to cover the debt, plus some General fund dollars were used to balance the budget without a tax increase

[WHITEY]

Dude, take a pill. I just pointed out that the entire short-fall on revenue was not made up by cutting the budget. As for the state tax relief fund, I don't see the point of it. If the state wants to give me money back then just take less on my state income tax. I've never like the whole take from me with the left hand and give back a portion with the right hand and expect me to jump up and down in glee. I won't address the anti-capitalist rant about Delta and KIA. As for the previous administration, I was new to the county and not informed enough to what was going on.

I figured that you had to be new to the county, and was not aware of the tax and spend habits of the previous administration.

 

I never knew that it was anti-capitalist to expect the large corporations to pay their fair share of taxes that ordinary citizens have to pay but hey, I learn something everyday

 

I would note though, That the tax incentives given to the large corporations this year would have been more than enough to retain and add new teachers, To Provide the basic quality education for our kids and Grandchildren.

 

No need for a pill to figure this out

[The Sound Guy]

Wouldn't the mill-rate on the bond need to go up again if the tax digest decreased again?

 

It may, esp for all of the school bonds, but that's beyond the control of the Board and as long as it's revenue neutral, not really a tax increase. Now if the School system has sold the second half of the already approved $125 million in bonds, that *WILL* be an increase and a sizable one. The county bonds went up from 0.5 mil in 2008 to 1.6 mil in 2009, I think that was the Courthouse bonds and the Greenspace/wildlife bonds.

 

The only parts of the bill that can be controlled are:

 

State Tax - Obviously the state controls this and I doubt it will ever go down.

Fire Tax - Not sure who decides this, I would imagine the County Commissioners.

County M&O - The County Commissioners control this.

School M&O - The School board controls. However, as I recall from the days of the Bond arguments, there is a state limit on the millage rate (20 mils)and we're fairly close to it. I suspect they want to hold that last mil or so for a real emergency. (School flooding out like happened in Cobb in Austell.) I've read that they can go over 20 mils, but the county must vote and approve them going over it.

 

The Bonds (Courthouse, School, Wildlife) are all set in their payments, unless they are renegotiated, and the millage will have to be changed as needed to pay them.

 

There are also three sales taxes that affect property taxes:

 

LOST - Implemented in 1978. No vote since, so this seems to be a permanent tax. I have googled a lot this morning and can find very little information on what this goes for. Looking on my tax bill from last year, there is a note that the county reduced their millage rate by 3.080 mils due to income from a LOST, I assume this is that income. Anybody on here that was in Paulding in 1978 remember any details about this tax?

 

SPLOST - Started in 1987, re-approved for 1991, 1995, 2000, 2005 expires in 2011 and now up for vote in July 2010. Supports various capital projects that would otherwise have to have bonds issued or come out of M&O, so it reduces property tax rates. (assuming the projects would be done anyway)

 

ELOST - Started in 1997, re-approved for 2001 and 2006, expires in 2011 also. Supports capital improvements to the school system, allowing M&O budget to go to operations and reducing school bond requirements. Income from the last one was used to guarantee a bond payment that was taken out soon after approval and spent on BOE building, Gyms/Theaters at a couple of high schools and started the North Paulding complex. Complex was completed using some of the $125 million in Bond money voted on two years ago and I suspect the income from the SPLOST over the bond payments since then (if any) has been used to supplement the bond for the various new schools under construction. (I've never seen detailed finance information from the School board, so don't know for sure) I expect to see a vote to renew this tax on the next election, or more likely a special election on the order of the bond vote.

 

A lot of possibilities for the tax rates to change on our bills in Nov 2010 and Nov 2011.

[lotstodo]

LTD I disagree with you on this post If a home was assessed at $200,000 in 2008 And taxed at 6.5 mil and was reassed at $190,000 in 2009 and taxed at 6.65 mil the taxes would be less, Same house was assessed at $190,000 in 2010 Taxes would still be less that 2008 for the M&O

 

Yes the taxes would be more in 2009 and 2010 for two reasons The bond had to be paid for the Courthouse Which the taxpayers had no vote And the Greenspace Bond which the voters elected to be taxed for, Both of whuch were passed in the previous adminstration and not taxed for as provided for in the resolutions psssed by the previous adminstration

 

And the HTR was not funded both years by the legislature

Not all of those that were reassessed lost enough value to make up for the increased millage rate. Some did, some didn't. That means that not all homeowners saw a reduction. That's all I'm saying. Certainly most of the increase in the individual property tax payments was due to the loss of the HTR, but the premise that all homeowners "saw a decrease in their property taxes" is erroneous. The county is getting by on decreased revenues however, and I appreciate that.

 

The tax paid by the individual homeowner would be increased or decreased based upon their assessment and the application of the millage rate increase.

[The Sound Guy]

It was named for the Watson Family that the land was purchased from. This was part of the deal for them to sell

the land to the county.

 

Ah, thank you. Interesting. I wonder if they gave the county a discount for naming rights.

[surepip]

Sound Guy this is an excellent post that pretty well sums up the budget process and the taxing process.

 

For too long the citizens of this County have been hoodwinked into thinking they were actually getting a tax cut, Only to discover when they got their tax bill they were actually paying more taxes soley based on higher property assessments.

 

 

Looking at the proposed budget Chairman Austin Stated that the tax revenue will be down by Appox. $6.7 million if I read this correctely.

 

This means to me that $6.7 million dollars will stay in the local economy, And in the pockets of the property owners of Paulding County.

 

This is unheard of in Paulding County for at least the past ten years, And probably beyond that.

It appears to me that his adminstration is in fact working for us, The tax payers.

 

Chairman Austin, Is to be comended for a Balanced budget with no Millage rate increase during these recessionary times.

 

As An added note I heard that the School Board was also not proposing a tax increase this year, If this proves to be true Kudos to the School Board for not raising taxes this year also.

 

It is simply amazing what a few changes in adminstrations Both Commissioner's and School Board can do for the citizens of this county.

 

 

And I hope the voters appreciate the fact we have a chairman, and at least one commissioner [Tommie Graham] who have obviously been working hard at cutting spending where ever possible and not rubber-stamping spending, spending, spending. Yes, the fire station at Burnt Hickory was delayed a couple of months when Mr Graham questioned the square footage projected costs, but when it was all done and finished, the cost was substantially less than what it would have been.

 

It is kind of scary to stop and think how the tax and spend previous administration under King Jerry would have handled this kind of economic situation, and how much they would have raised our taxes.

 

And I shutter to think what could happen if certain candidates might make it to some of the commission seats in the upcoming election who are associated with the previous group.

 

We are finally, at least for the first time in the past 12+ years, headed in the right direction.

 

Now if we can find a way to get industry and warehousing to come to Paulding we might actually be able to shift some of the tax burden off the residential citizens.