Several years ago (1978) Talbot County instituted a TAX CAP after a similar hugely unacceptable tax increase to Wicomico County incensed the voters to action.
From 1978 until 1995 ballot questions were put before the voters to remove the TAX CAP. Finally, in January of 1995 a Coalition of SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS - Board of Education, Chamber of Commerce, PTA, NAACP, League of Women Voters, and other individuals SUED to overturn the TAX CAP and they won!
The TAX CAP was ruled unconstitional. Do you think VOICE should have gone for a TAX CAP? That certainly would have been an easy 'kneejerk' thing to do in light of the Court's decision.
After the TAX CAP was ruled unconstitutional in January 1995, The Talbot County Council in May raised the property tax by 46.%. That's right they raised the property taxes by almost 50 percent! But they - SPECIAL INTEREST - didn't have enough! The next year, in 1996 they raised it another 46.3%!!! And we - Wicomico Residents- think 23.7% is bad. Now let's try and add this up. . . .what's 46.1% and 46.3% over two years. Let's hold the math until the end of this lesson.
The Talbot voters were so incensed they searched for a way to stop these run-a-way politicos and came up with the Revenue Cap concept. The voters rallied to get it on the ballot and it was passed in 1996 by 72.21% of the voters! It stands as law today in that County. Even after MANY attempts to have it removed . . VOICE used the EXACT wording in their petition as was used in Talbot County. It's exactly the same language that is LAW in Talbot now.
So what have we learned today. Hopefully we've learned that from the time a TAX CAP was ruled unconstitutional and was replaced by a REVENUE CAP in Talbot County (1995 - 1996) - property taxes went up 92.4%!!! Actually that would not be entirely accurate as I'm told that before the REVENUE CAP could become law the actual true tax increase was 113.8%
The next question is a bit more subjective - after this current events history lesson - is the Daily Times staunch reason for objecting to the REVENUE CAP . . . do you now feel the VOICE proposals are obviously not well thought out?"If your property tax increased by 113.8%, would the difference be greater or less than your recent pay raise?
"THOSE WHO IGNORE HISTORY ARE DESTINED TO REPEAT IT"
Thank you Beezer for providing such enlightenment for the readers. As I recall, the voters of Wicomico County voted 66% to ammend the County Charter. If Pollitt and the Council think the citizens are ready to trust their judgement on property tax revenue assessments, they can simply put it on the ballot to allow the people to vote on rescinding the revenue cap. If the voters were to approve, the Charter could be ammended to no longer require revenue restrictions on property taxes.
ReplyDeleteAs for myself, I would vote not to ammend.
Don Coffin
Mr. Coffin:
ReplyDeleteI guess you and VOICE are against the ridiculous proposal to pay like $10,000 per acre for that land near Hebron for another park -- and isn't the owner your son???
The revenue cap was about the lack of trust in our gov't. Unfortunately, that hasn't changed. Pollitt made that one of his goals during his campaign, but we are still awaiting his promise to fire every single one at the landfill who stole from us. Until he is able to fulfill his promises, the revenue cap must continue.
ReplyDeleteCoffin = hypocrit
ReplyDeleteCut spending except for welfare for the wealthy, right, Don!
Tax revenue comes from many sources. State funds have been allocated for open space and park expenditures for our counties. Whether we like it or not, until the system is changed, that is the way it is. In the case the county decides to purchase this property for a recreational and park area for the people, it will do so with approximatley $1,000,000 in savings over the previous site.
ReplyDelete10:46--
ReplyDeleteIs the price of this land -- $10,000 per acre -- appropriate at this time. That's the real point.
The other deal Pollitt tried to do was dead on arrival the asking price was so ridiculous -- and that was over a year ago, and land values are much lower.
If the County is overpaying there is no "savings" pal.
According to the average of legitimate appraisals; market value at present is 10K per acre. Of course, if any landowner out there has comparable land, with good soils and road frontage for less money in a similar geographical location they should consider selling it to the County post haste.
ReplyDeleteThe way this County was headed before intitiation of the Revenue Cap the average Joe Blow ought to get down on their knees and be thankful that the Grass Roots coalition of Voters rallied to have this legislation passed.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise, we would be a mirror image of what happened to Talbot.
Thank you Beezer for shedding light on this subject.
ReplyDeleteI am horrified at the thought of this County not having a Revenue Cap. Should it ever come-up for a referendum to repeal-it I'm leaving my name with Joe so that I can fight against the passage of such. No telling where our property taxes would be now without the Revenue Cap. After Ehrlich's State Property assessment record increase I personally have had enough of this State. Any further increases and I'm moving out of here.
12:20 --
ReplyDeleteIt was "legitimate appraisals" that got the loans for those condos in downtown Salisbury -- one has sold 6 of 42 units in 18 months and the other went belly up in the building phase. And rubber band appraisals are responsible for much of our financial debacle today.
The land is not worth anything close to $10,000 per acre now, or tomorrow. Take a look at the sale comps that they used (when, where, etc.) and get ready for a shock.
2:12 PM
ReplyDeletePrior to the tax hike put in place at the time the revenue cap was voted in was the first tax hike in a long long time. Don Coffin is NOT some messiah. He and his crew went around selling a false bill of goods. It was presented as a tax rate cap. It also was a no-brainer. Hey, want to make it so they cant raise your taxes? Sign here. This wise bunch of voters, also later voted in the Executive form of Government. Which is costing the taxpayers ATLEAST an extra million dollars a year. Not to mention the sweetheart deal given to the county attourney to the tune of about a million that the county employees pension plan will have to fund. This revenue cap was great for the realtors. It is a shame that all the growth that has occurred since that time, couldn't go into the tax base. Maybe the county would then have enough for more officers, maybe actually put money into the roads instead of hoping for the crumbs from the state. Now the taxrate is lower than it was in 1989. Which I guess should be good, but in reality is bad. We have many more "mouths to feed" and any new mouths wont bring additional property tax revenue because it can't increase by more than 2 percent. That is realized through assesments alone. So all these new homes that have popped up over the last several years, technically dont add anything to the taxbase as far as property tax is concerned. The question was asked "If your property tax was raised by 113%", the big word is IF, especially considering we only had one tax hike in years. Instead of IF, how about WHEN, this cap puts the county and our kid education in jeopardy because of the effects that the cap WILL have.
long live the tax cap!pollitt is a true liberal and will spend your dollars as well as your grandchildrens just like the so called president we have in office now. and to my knowledge could not even manage and govern a ant farm. wico countys executive type of goverment has not proved effective at all to date but cost more taxpayers dollars for pollitts upgraded adminstative staff and the judicial curtain he pulled over the taxpayers eyes with the baker retirement deal.
ReplyDeletethe revenue cap must continue. it keeps governemnt honest.
ReplyDeleteIf revenue can increase by only 2%, then that should be the limit on population growth. How can a 2% increase in revenue provide services for the hundreds of people moving here? All county departments submitted a flat budget and one with a 10% decrease. If all of the 10% decrease ones are adopted, the county will still be $12 million short. More people, less spending, still millions short. When we feel the cut in services, we will either live with it or repeal the revenue cap.
ReplyDelete