You Want to Raise Your Tax on Yourself? Forget It.

Del. James Edmunds (R-Halifax)

by Dick Hall-Sizemore

Several years ago, officials in Halifax County were confronting the problem of what to do about the local high school. There was consensus that something needed to be done. The only question was whether to make extensive renovations or build a new one. Depending on the option selected, the price tag was estimated to range from $88 million to $100 million.

The debt service on either amount would have been significant, especially for a county with a median household income of $42,289, ranking it 105 out of 132 jurisdictions. At the behest of his home county, Delegate James Edmunds, R-Halifax, introduced legislation (HB 1634) in the 2019 Session of the General Assembly that would have authorized any locality, subject to approval in a local referendum, to increase its local sales tax, with the additional revenue earmarked for school renovation or construction. As was common with such legislation, the bill morphed from one of general application to being applicable only to Halifax County and with a cap of one cent on any increase. The bill was reported out by the House Finance Committee on a 13-8 bipartisan vote and passed both houses with strong bipartisan votes (77-23, House; 29-11, Senate).

In 2020, Edmunds was back with HB 1631 to provide the same authority to another county in his district, Charlotte. The word had obviously spread among counties because the Republican delegates representing the districts to the east and west of Edmunds’ Halifax County introduced similar legislation. Delegate Thomas Wright put in HB 200, which extended the option to Mecklenburg County, while Delegate Danny Marshall’s HB 486 provided the authority to Henry and Pittsylvania Counties and the city of Danville. Before it ultimately passed, the list in Marshall’s bill had been expanded to include Patrick and Northampton counties. Some Senators also got into the act with Senator Lynwood Lewis, D-Accomack, putting in SB 1028 for Northampton County and Senator Tommy Norment, R-James City County, introducing SB 224 for Gloucester County.

Because none of these affected all local governments, they fell under the definition of “special” legislation. The state constitution requires a 2/3 majority vote in each house for the passage of special legislation. Therefore, a strong bipartisan vote in the House (at least 67 votes) and Senate (at least 27 votes) was required. The number of votes actually cast in the House in support of these bills ranged from 70 to 79. In the Senate, on a few occasions the number of affirmative votes fell a vote or two short of the required two-thirds, but, upon reconsideration, the necessary votes were acquired.

In summary, on July 1, 2020, eight counties and one city had the option to increase their local sales tax by one cent, subject to approval in referendum, to help pay for school renovations and construction. The most relevant aspects of that law bear emphasizing:

  1. Optional—Any increase in the local sales tax is optional on the part of the locality.
  2. Referendum—The governing body does not have the authority to increase the tax unilaterally. The increase must be approved in a local referendum, initiated by resolution of the governing body.
  3. Limited—The sales tax cannot be increased by more than one cent. If enacted, it would not apply to the sale of groceries.
  4. Earmarked—Revenue earned from the one cent increase can be used only to pay costs associated with school renovation and construction. It cannot be used for ongoing operating costs.
  5. Special fund—The revenue from the tax increase is deposited into a special fund.
  6. Expiration—If the capital projects for school renovation or construction are financed by bonds, the additional tax shall expire when the bonds are paid off. If bonds are not used, the tax shall expire no later than 20 years after it was authorized.

It should also be noted that, except for Danville, all the localities authorized to exercise this option are rural counties and, further, that with the exception of Northampton, all are represented by Republicans, who sponsored the needed legislation.

Halifax County was the first to take advantage of this legislation. In the fall of 2019, the year the first bill passed, 70% of the county’s voters in a referendum approved increasing their sales tax by one cent. To fully appreciate this margin of approval, one needs to realize that Halifax County is not a hotbed of “tax and spend” liberals. To the contrary, it is a deep red locality. Donald Trump got 57% of its votes in both 2016 and 2020 and Glenn Youngkin got 64% of the vote in 2021.

Last fall, there were similar referenda in neighboring Pittsylvania County and the city of Danville. It easily passed in Danville with 60% of the voters approving it but was defeated in Pittsylvania by 23 votes out of 25,479 votes cast.

Edmunds came back this year for a third bite at the apple with HB 63, adding Prince Edward County to the list of localities authorized to have a referendum on raising its sales tax to cover the costs of school renovation and construction. Delegate Sally Hudson, D-Charlottesville, joined in with HB 545, adding Charlottesville to the list. After a statute that initially provided an exception for a single locality has been amended to add more localities to the list and more keep requesting to be added, the General Assembly often adopts the attitude, “Aw, what the hell? We have let these other localities do this and the world hasn’t come to an end, so let’s allow all of them to do it.” This was the purpose of another bill by Hudson (HB 531) and one (HB 1099) from Delegate Dave LaRock, R-Loudoun.

They all hit a brick wall. A subcommittee of the House Finance Committee, consisting of five Republicans and three Democrats, struck LaRock’s bill from the docket at his request and then proceeded to kill the other bills on a straight party line vote of 5-3.

There is another bill that would give all localities this option. The Senate has passed, 28-12, SB 472, introduced by Senator Jennifer McClella, D-Richmond.  Considering the fate of the House bills, however, the future of the Senate bill is pretty dim.

In summary, five members of a subcommittee killed efforts to allow localities to help themselves pay the costs of renovating and constructing schools. Those localities will have to hope that the $500 million in general fund appropriation that then-Governor Northam recommended for this purpose is included in the final budget bill. Of course, with construction costs being what they are, that $500 million will not go far.

There is one other aspect of this story that deserves some attention. In the 2019 and 2020 sessions of the General Assembly, a total of seven bills passed that provided some localities the option of raising their sales tax for the purpose of covering school renovation and construction costs. Delegate Roxann Robinson, R-Chesterfield, voted for each one of them. For the 2022 Session, she was appointed to the House Finance Committee for the first time, and, moreover, appointed to chair the committee. As the committee chair, she is a member of each subcommittee of the full committee. When the local-option sales tax bills came up in subcommittee, she was present and voted to kill each one. It is evident that the Speaker, Todd Gilbert (Shenandoah), who voted against all such bills in the past, had a “come-to-Jesus” meeting with Robinson before her appointment.

My Soapbox

The subcommittee took up Edmunds’ and Hudson’s local-option sales tax bills at a meeting that began at 7:30 on a Friday morning. The subcommittee heard from the patrons and a large number of other people wishing to speak to the bills, both in-person and virtually. Some speakers represented organizations such as the Virginia Association of Counties, the Virginia Municipal League, and various education-related groups. Most of the speakers were private citizens, speaking for themselves. No speaker expressed any opposition to the bills. During the testimony, only one question or comment was made by any member of the subcommittee. (Robinson asked Edmunds about the status of the referendum in Halifax County.) When it came time to vote, Delegate Nick Freitas, R-Culpeper, made a motion to “lay the bill on the table” for each bill. Under the House Rules, such a motion is nondebatable. So, without any debate or comment, five Republicans summarily killed the bills. One would think they would have at least had the courtesy and decency to explain to those citizens why they were opposed to giving them the right to tax themselves.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

81 responses to “You Want to Raise Your Tax on Yourself? Forget It.”

  1. DJRippert Avatar

    While I support decentralization of power in Virginia I want that decentralization to be tax neutral. In other words, if localities are going to assume more of a role in financing school construction and renovation then the monies previously used for this should be “taken back” in the form of tax decreases.

    The Northam Administration and the Democratic General Assembly raised taxes over and over again, although those tax hikes were usually hidden. One would assume that those raised taxes were intended for something. If school construction and renovation are sufficiently high priorities the extra taxes of the Northam days should allocated to those efforts before “allowing” localities to tax themselves yet again.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Ah, so you want to have your cake and eat it, too. You favor getting rid of the Dillon Rule and decentralizing government, but you don’t want that decentralized government to be able to tax you more.

      1. I cannot speak for DJ, but I interpreted his comment to mean that if localities are going to have the taxing power to finance their own schools bestowed upon them, the power of the state to tax for that same purpose needs to be taken away.

        I’m pretty sure that is what he meant by “tax neutral”.

        1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
          Dick Hall-Sizemore

          The state does not tax for the express purpose of financing school construction. The cost of constructing and renovating schools has traditionally been a responsibility of localities, The money Northam put in the budget for that purpose would be from the general fund.

          1. DJRippert Avatar

            Then the localities should have always been able to raise those funds from whatever source they choose. Why a 1% cap? Why a 20 year limit? Just let the localities take it over entirely.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            The more local autonomy, the better. Why argue the opposite unless it’s all or nothing? Geeze, guy, all the years you’ve commented here and you do a 180!

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            The state does decide what types of taxes the localities can levy – and if I recall , you’ve argued against this – that you support “home rule”. Right?

            I believe you have argued for local income tax, right?

            So it appears you have changed your view and that’s all I’m asking.

            I thought you were opposed to Richmond imposing limitations on localities on how and what to tax.

            I have , from the beginning, supported local taxation for local needs. Referendums and elections to hold locally-elected accountable.

            I thought that’s what you supported.

            but now I’m confused as to your position.

            Do you oppose Dillon?

          4. I understand that the state does not have a tax specific to school construction, but if localities are empowered to completely take over funding of school construction, then our state taxes should be reduced by an amount commensurate with what is currently being spent by the state on school construction.

        2. DJRippert Avatar

          You got it. Glad to see my comment wasn’t that hard to understand.

  2. DJRippert Avatar

    At $100m to construct a new school and 1,487 students in Halifax High School (as of 2018-2019) the cost per student of new construction is $67,249.

    Meanwhile, Halifax County is considerably smaller in population than it was 100 years ago. It shed 6%+ of its population between 2010 and 2020.

    How big do you build the new high school?

    At $67,249 in construction costs per student it doesn’t take long for an overbuild to add up to real money squandered.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      You always wonder what these schools would cost if they removed the bells and whistles and went pretty basic. I’ve seen some that seem pretty fancy. The challenge for funding them, even over 30 years, is real. I haven’t objected to the idea of a local option sales tax approved by referendum.

      1. Agreed. Localities need to force their architects and engineers to simplify school designs.

        There is no reason why designs for high schools needs to be fancy enough to win architectural design awards.

        Think rectangles with peaked roofs.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          And a steeple with a bell.

          1. Really? Based on my comment history here have you ever gotten even a minor inkling that I am interested in injecting any form of religion into our public schools?

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Perhaps I should have said cupola?

          3. Oops. I was typing my reply and did not see this before I posted. Anyway, great minds, etc.

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Yes, great minds, same gutters.

          5. Exactly!

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            No. Not religion. The Little Red Schoolhouse.
            http://www.aussiehomebrewing.com/brewerplans/structures/46.html
            Does that look like a church? There’s 1000s of ’em.

          7. Oh, okay. But wouldn’t that have a cupola instead of a steeple?

            And besides, it’s an unnecessary expense since these days most students live too far from the school to hear the bell…

          8. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Not the bell I have in mind!

          9. Thanks.

            A wonderful lady in Fluvanna County undertook a similar project with one of the old Rosenwald Schools a few years ago.

            See page 14 of the newspaper at the link.

            http://fluvannareview.com/archive/attachments/7967_07-20-17FR.pdf

            EDIT – I finally found a link that I can copy and paste here that will actually work!

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        like anything else, like fire stations, libraries, parks, etc – the best government is the one closest to the voters who will hold them accountable.

        Seems like that has been a Conservative value as long as I can remember.

        Some guy/gal in Richmond who represents some other county or region should NOT be telling me that he/she thinks my local school/fire house/etc has too many bells and whistles.

        This is antithetical to good government, IMHO.

        1. Some guy/gal in Richmond who represents some other county or region should NOT be telling me that he/she thinks my local school/fire house/etc has too many bells and whistles.

          If the “local school/fire house/etc” is being paid for by state tax revenue then any “guy/gal” anywhere in the state has every right to tell you your new facility has too many bells and whistles.

          1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            But those local construction projects are not being paid for with state tax revenue. They are local responsibilities.

          2. No state tax money whatsoever is used in the construction of new public school buildings?

            If that is the case, the I retract my comment.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar

      Why should any voters or delegates outside of Halifax have the right to tell Halifax and their votes what they can do or not for their own locality needs? Isn’t this why we have local elections?

      This is a clear line between Dillion and local decison-making by voters.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      In Afghanistan, just like the dozens of new schools we built this past 2 decades.

  3. James Kiser Avatar
    James Kiser

    Another question that should be asked is who benefits from schools that cost 100 million dollars? 1 story warehouses can cheaply thrown up and subdivided for use and will not cost anywhere near 50 million much less 88 million.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      I would have thought that local voters and taxpayers would be the ones to answer that question – not folks in Richmond. We hold local hearings and local elections for these decisions. Used to be, this was a Conservative value.

      1. James Kiser Avatar
        James Kiser

        never saw a building educate anyone but go ahead waste the money My comment was not aimed at the gist of the article. we spend billions on sports and they don’t educate anyone worth a damn.

    2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      As Larry says, that is up to the locality. If that is what you want in your county and your kids, talk to your supervisor.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        I have to say I feel flattered with comments from both pro and con commenters cite “Larry”!

        😉

      2. James Kiser Avatar
        James Kiser

        actually that is not correct most of the money comes from the state allocations as you well know.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          for capital projects, my county owes more than 200 million in debt if I recall correctly. And we did spend about 100 million for the last high school. For operating, taxpayers pay about 1/2 the cost and the state/Feds kick in the rest. Schools are by far, the biggest expense for most counties/cities.

  4. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    I’ll explain. Or at least offer an explanation.
    Maybe, just maybe, the answer isn’t to always throw money at a problem?
    Maybe there is a reason underlying why there is a problem?
    What if you freed Halifax from having to do the DEI Virtue Shuffle and devoted money to…you know…teaching?

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      That is operating money. It has nothing to do with the cost of school renovations or construction.

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Money is fungible.

        1. DJRippert Avatar

          Money is, by design, among the most fungible things in the world.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            It may be but it’s LOCAL money being decided by local taxpayers and their locally-elected leaders.

            Of all folks, you KNOW that Richmond should not be involved in these decisions!

            Come on DJ.. stand up for what you have argued for in the past!

            This is Government deciding what is best for citizens rather than letting citizens decide.

          2. DJRippert Avatar

            Larry – Dick says it’s a local issue. But Northam wants to fund a half billion out of the General Fund. That’s not local. And the localities are hamstrung on how they can raise taxes.

            My point is that it should be local, the localities should be unencumbered and the “extra” half billion hanging around Richmond should be rebated to taxpayers so they can afford the extra sales tax.

            If I were a Republican in the GA I might well oppose allowing the localities the ability to tax for school construction and maintenance until I had assurances that the state woudn’t tax for that too.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            uh… is that response really ON POINT?

            You’ve argued long and hard over the years that the clown show in Richmond telling Fairfax what they could do about local taxation. You’ve argued for Fairfax to decide the taxes, right?

            So, now that Youngkin and the GOP isin charge, you’re changing your view to a top-down Richmond thing?

            geeze guy…

          4. DJRippert Avatar

            What I don’t want is what we are getting – both the state and the localities taxing for school construction. This should be totally a local matter and Richmond should butt out.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar

            As long as the State is not imposing it on localities and it’s voluntary and up to the locality… it’s fine.

            Lots of things are funded with both local and state funding…even Federal funding – as long as it is a local choice on local needs.

            Localities have to fund their local share of schools, and deputies, and other to go along with some state funding but the state should not dictate to the locality how to tax and fund local needs.

          6. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            Until the appropriation proposed by Northam, is was totally a local matter. Depending on the final budget bill, it may remain a totally local matter.

          7. That is not at all what he said.

        2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
          Dick Hall-Sizemore

          I doubt that any money freed from the “DEI Virtue Shuffle” at the local level would cover the salary and fringe benefits for one teacher, much less cover the debt service on over $100 million in bonds.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            But my doubt starts before that. My point is that just throwing more and more money at “education” is not the best solution. One room schoolhouses and so forth. It is possible to get educated without a lot of money. And more substantively, re the DEIVirtue Shuffle, what kind of bureaucratic costs are imposed by VDOE regs and do they have any value? Is their “value” worth the cost?

      2. Sir,

        There seems to be some misunderstanding among some of us (me included) about exactly how our public school systems are funded and which level of government (fed, state, local) pays what . You seem to be quite knowledgeable about how it all works.

        Would you consider using your considerable writing talents to prepare and post a short primer on exactly how our public schools are funded for both capital projects and operating expenses? I know I would appreciate it.

        If you have already done so at some point in the past will you post a link to the article?

  5. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    The Friday morning Finance subcommittee #3 meeting has long been known as the “Subcommittee of Death.” I’ve noted the local options bills before, but my recollection is it started with Norment’s bill for the Williamsburg/James City area, which I think (perhaps) was the first to add the second local penny, bringing the general sales tax to 7 percent. That’s not dedicated to school construction, not there.

    Whether it is some tax policy thinking, looking for a uniform approach, behind the refusal to go further, or just some internal House politics, I have no idea and have not asked. Just because no opposition was expressed in the public meeting doesn’t mean there was nobody pushing against these bills. I had seen the bill that made it basically a statewide option, for any locality, and knew that was doomed.

    Nothing, nothing, prevents the localities from raising their other taxes. They like the sales tax because it is almost invisible, consumers do not usually see it, and some (often much) is paid by visitors. Raise the real estate, vehicle or business property taxes and the pitchforks appear.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Oh yeah, two other things to be sure to have your travel insurance cover;
      1) Air Ambulance — this can be 10s of $1000s and you may not be able to decline the service.
      2) Repatriation of Remains. Believe it or not, other countries don’t want you if you cannot sign your credit card vouchers.

      If you have Plan F supplement it covers 60 days foreign medical. There are others, but you should check coverages for maximums and deductibles.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        They can bury me next to Morrison.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          You won’t rate. Ever see the 60s romcom “Avante”?

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      That last paragraph is what I thought. Especially the argument that their revenue needs are being funded by visitors. Plus, it may be that the other sources of revenue are decreasing as these rural counties decline…

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Call it a “fee”. Nobody pays attention to fees. “Read my lips, ‘It’s not a new tax. It’s a fee.’”

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Call it a “fee”. Nobody pays attention to fees. “Read my lips, ‘It’s not a new tax. It’s a fee.’”

  6. LarrytheG Avatar

    So it looks like when the GOP attains the upper level offices like Governor, they reveal an ugly top-down authoritarian streak – way worse than Northam and the Dems who often supported local decision-making.

    This is the SAME party that railed against top-down “mandates” and “autocratic edicts” in the past… like just last year!

    😉

    Yep. We always knew that Conservatives had this authoritarian streak

    Now we actually have top-level folks who want to DICTATE to local school boards what KIND of schools they should have or not – no matter what the local taxpayers want!

    And, WOW, DJR, the resident anti-Dillon, anti-Richmond Clown Show is also on board!

    LORDY!

    1. DJRippert Avatar

      This is my last attempt to try to make a simple point clear to you. Northam’s proposal to spend $500m of General Fund money for school construction proves that money taken at the state level is being spent on this matter. If, and only if, the state butts out of this area then (and only then) would I support localities being able to do whatever the hell they want to fund their school construction and maintenance issues.

      So, these bills to provide additional taxing authority for localities should also include language that prohibits the state from separately and additionally using state funds for this purpose.

      Clarity. Simplicity.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        DJ. The State CAN and SHOULD offer money for needed things ,with strings attached , for localities that might want to go that route. That’s DIFFERENT than interfering with localities local taxation issues.

        Let me give a similar example. The State offers help for things like fixing sewage treatment plants and the FEDs offer money for law enforcement to add deputies and firemen.

        That’s fine and it’s different from the Feds or state from actually telling localities what kind of school they should build or how to finance it.

        Surely you’d agree.

      2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        If the General Assembly adopts Northam’s proposal, it will, in effect, be saying, “Rather than let you tax yourself for school construction, we are going to use state general fund money to do it.”

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          The state can and does that – not only for schools but other things, like Courts, wastewater treatment and other things – and when they do that – they can and do set standards that have to be met to get the money.

          Localities are free to NOT take that money just like they are free to not take Fed money that has strings attached.

          Thats a different thing than what they do with local tax money where they usually have to hold hearings, sometimes referendum and are subject to elections over their decisions.

          I think that is good government, myself.

  7. Randy Huffman Avatar
    Randy Huffman

    I don’t get it. My understanding is the state has uniform income tax, auto and sales tax. Localities get a portion of the sales tax (perhaps others), and then set their own taxes for a variety of things as someone mentioned below. Not only property taxes of course, but meals tax, housing, business license, etc. What is this fixation on the sales tax rate (is the income tax next?). If they need more revenue and can sell it to their constituents, increase property tax or one of the others. Lets not forget that the sales tax is not only collected by local retailers, but also internet sales. Nobody seems to care about their processing and remitting responsibilities.

    Nice tune from the Beatles:

    Should five per cent appear too small
    Be thankful I don’t take it all
    Cos I’m the taxman, yeah I’m the taxman

    If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street
    If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat
    If you get too cold I’ll tax the heat
    If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet

    Taxman!
    Cos I’m the taxman, yeah I’m the taxman

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Localities have various different ways for taxing and raising revenues (often granted by the state, and especially so in Dillon Rule states). How localities actually tax is – often initiated as a hearing where their constituents can let them know how they feel. Later, there are elections to hold the elected accountable. That’s an appropriate discussion between those being taxed and those who are taxing and using the revenues for local infrastructure and services.

      It’s not a State issue and should not be IMHO.

      This is the essence of government that is closest to the people. It’s a fundamental value of Conservatism and good governance.

      I’m just shocked that in a blog dominated by Conservatives that they not only won’t stand up for this, but they seem to actually advocate more authoritarian top-down edicts from Richmond, sometimes on the premise that you can’t trust local officials.

      Good GAWD Googlamooga!

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        “Those localities will have to hope that the $500 million in general fund appropriation that then-Governor Northam recommended for this purpose is included in the final budget bill.”

        Does that sound like a locality based tax and spend item?

        This is a mish-mash where Richmond and the localities are involved.

      2. Randy Huffman Avatar
        Randy Huffman

        Again, my point is the localities can raise revenue other ways. When I left Chicago decades ago, the City worked with the state to have a higher sales tax for public transportation. But this was the City of Chicago, not Halifax or the city of Charlottesville.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Virginia is somewhat different than Illinois but localities should have an ability to levy taxes and fund their needs according to their choices with taxpayers and voters holding them accountable.

          Transportation in Virginia has always been primarily a State level function. Virginia is one of four states where the DOT is responsible for all roads except in some cities and towns and 2 counties Henrico and Alexandria.

        2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
          Dick Hall-Sizemore

          You are entirely correct. The county could have raised its property tax and, it probably would have, if the local option sales tax increase had not been available. There are some downsides to raising the property tax, particularly in a rural county. There is not a lot of industrial or manufacturing base and the commercial sector is limited. Therefore, the burden of an increased property tax would have fallen on homeowners, farmers, and large landowners. Many large tracts of land are non-income producing, making a higher property tax even harder to bear. In such a situation, the board of supervisors is very reluctant to raise the real property tax rate. Steve Haner contends that one of the advantages of a sales tax increase is that it is hidden. That may be true, but it is also easier to bear. One pays it out pennies at a time, which is a lot easier than being faced with a property tax bill that is hundreds of dollars higher that needs to be paid in a lump sum. Finally, as Steve also pointed out, an increase in the sales tax can also get revenue from non-residents.

          1. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            Fair enough, but that’s where meals tax, hospitality taxes for hotels, and other things can come in. The best way to increase revenue is of course, economic development. But then you got to compete with the neighboring County or City with lower taxes (and of course big companies are going to have their hand out for concessions)!

          2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            There are statutory limits on the meals tax and transient occupancy tax that localities can levy. Probably the only sources upon which there are no limits are real property and personal property.

          3. Matt Adams Avatar

            “Probably the only sources upon which there are no limits are real property and personal property.”

            The problem with the latter is that is keeps clunkers on the road because people can’t afford the PPT on new vehicles.

  8. LarrytheG Avatar

    IF this is turning out like the Gilmore car tax, it will be an abomination.

    Glimore and company attempted to dictate how much localities could tax and so put a cap on it then turned around and sent state money back to the localities to cover the gap.

    Talk about needlessly bureaucracy and just foolish approach to government and taxation in general – especially given the fact that
    money is indeed fungible. Now, it’s just another state to local bag of money that taxpayers have little or no say over.

    So, now, we’re talking about doing a similar thing with the local sales taxes where the state takes them away but then promises to fund them from Richmond.

    In both cases, the car tax and the sales tax – where do they think the money is coming from to pay for these monies going back to localities?

    It’s coming from the very same taxpayers who now have been essentially removed from holding the local elected accountable.

    NOw, it’s just another budget line item , mandatory spending, in the state budget.

    And the devil is truly in the details. Is this a straight bag of wholly unrestricted money going back to the localities to spend as they please?

    I’m totally shocked that folks who consider themselves Conservatives think this is a good idea!

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      You are getting into another issue. Both Northam and Youngkin have proposed using state funds to replace local funds lost if the local sales tax on groceries is repealed. And you are right, this is a repeat of the mess created by Gilmore and the “repeal” of the car tax (which still exists and is often increased by localities, by the way).

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        This is why I call it an abomination where the State govt presumes to intrude into locality taxing issues , puts a cap on some tax and/or revokes that tax (sin number 1) AND THEN says they will make the locality ‘whole’ by state-funding of the lost revenue (sin number 2). It’s so wrong on multiple levels IMHO. Not only have the counties increased the car tax beyond that supposed “cap”since then, but the state is STILL on the hook every year to fund the original promise – with tax money collected from the same local taxpayers – sent to Richmond, then sent back to their locality as a refund/rebate (sin number 3) – in reality – NOW a hidden tax (sin number 4) now along with the bureaucracy (sin number 5) necessary to collect and move that money to Richmond and back. This is not fiscal conservatism. It’s not Conservative govt by any stretch of the imagination, IMHO.

  9. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Taxing a box of chicken from the Golden Skillet isn’t going to build a 100 million dollar school.

  10. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    I don’t have any answers on tax policy, but the recent sad loss due to fire of William Fox Elem School in Richmond brought some of these same questions to my mind. Some of the Fox parents were saying the State needs to step in to rebuild the school and fix the other 100+ year old schools in Richmond. I would think in Fairfax we do it ourselves with bond issues. God knows my night activity gets kicked out of schools here, because every 25 years or so Fairfax Co revamps each school. For my specific activity it approx. works out to every 8-10 years we get kicked out for renovations and have to move to a different school.

  11. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Taxing a box of chicken from the Golden Skillet isn’t going to build a 100 million dollar school.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Halifax County gets about $3 million annually from the additional one cent sales tax. That probably will not cover the total debt service for a new school but it will cover a good portion of it. They will have to use funds from other revenue sources to make up the difference.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead

        That is a good looking modern school. Legendary athletics. The Comets. Great mascot. Enrollment is declining. Why is there a need for a new school?
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_County_High_School#/media/File:Halifax_County_High_School.jpg

  12. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Park View High School in Loudoun has a similar issue. Like Halifax High it is an older 1970s school that has been remodeled a few times over the years. 43 million to renovate. As Loudoun’s only Title 1 school my bet is that the Patriots of Park View need a renovation of how education is presented in a Title 1 setting not a brick/mortar face lift. PV was renovated about 15 years ago. I think the 43 million going into what happens in the classroom would be better than cosmetic improvements. The same could be said of the Comets of Halifax.
    https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/virginia/loudoun-county-parents-fed-up-and-frustrated-over-building-conditions/65-96691413-0f67-49c7-8af5-31ee1b19614d

Leave a Reply