Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br />16 <br />Commissioner Price said she is concerned about residents' ability to live affordably. Tax and <br />fee increases are going to make it more expensive to build and to live here. We could be <br />moving in the direction of making Orange County too exclusive. It's heart- wrenching to hear <br />that long term residents have to move to Durham or Alamance because taxes and fees here <br />are too expensive for them. <br />Commissioner Burroughs agreed that social justice is a factor. And, she said, there is an <br />$11 M structural imbalance that we are required to address. I believe we will have to raise <br />taxes, either using the one -time or the incremental scenario. And I would make the case <br />now that we should go with the one -time increase option. She offered the following reasons: <br />first, no one likes tax increases, so doing it three years in a row is more painful than doing it <br />once. Second, this Board cannot bind future boards. We cannot count on future boards to <br />join us in fixing the structural imbalance. It is our responsibility as the Board today to provide <br />the solution. Third, we told folks who voted for the bond that there would be a tax increase in <br />FY18 -19. The farther in time we get from the bond referendum that generated this need, the <br />more distant the tax payers will be from those made the decision to raise their own taxes. A <br />one -time increase would maintain a closer connection between those who incurred the <br />obligation and those who are going to pay for it. <br />Commissioner Marcoplos said he feels strongly that a recession will occur in the not -too- <br />distant future. At the same time, our relationship with the State and federal governments has <br />never been worse. In my household when a big storm is predicted we get conservative <br />about how we handle our resources and how we make our plans. I want to take a more <br />conservative approach to the County budget until after the next recession and after the next <br />elections give me a firmer feel about the future, he said. My instinct right now would be to <br />agree with Mia, and have a full increase now before there is a crisis, and hope it will help us <br />to build up a cushion to weather the storm. Her other reasons were valid as well: a one -time <br />increase would be more palatable and predictable for people. Most people do not have a lot <br />of time in their lives to follow everything we do, so doing it once will be less of a burden on <br />them. <br />In reply to a question from Commissioner Dorosin, Ms. Hammersley said that in the absence <br />of any changes there will be a budget shortfall in FY18 -19 of $7M. Commissioner Dorosin <br />said that a tax increase is too narrow a frame for the Board's discussions today. The <br />broader discussion is whether our policies and practices have created an unaffordable <br />situation for residents. I don't think it's fair to say we don't like tax increases — I believe in <br />providing the funds the government needs to provide services. But the taxes here are very <br />high. It's easy when a lot of wealthy people tell us to raise their taxes, but there are people <br />moving away because they cannot afford to live here. We need to have three elements in all <br />our discussions: efficiencies, potential revenue increases -- like a tax increase -- and <br />potential cuts, he said. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that he agreed with Commissioner Marcoplos's perspective <br />regarding "the coming storm" and with Commissioner Dorosin's suggestion that the group <br />consider a range of solutions. We also have to look at the undesignated fund balance, he <br />said. I've been on the Board during periods when the property tax rate increased for eleven <br />years, and for the past eight years when it only went up once. We have come to the point in <br />terms of affordability where I think a tax increase is a last resort. The fund balance should be <br />the fourth part of the equation. My goal would be to pay for the school bonds without raising <br />taxes; I don't think we can answer today whether we can do that or not. It's a little early to <br />