Brazos County Tax Vote

3,269 Views | 34 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by LOYAL AG
brew1990
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0e7Sha6RoPGDd5sUkkpusBMGZKfnwC18aV1DgYNoLTD3c95EjnBVCBVL4FVbmyfcGl&id=8328760&mibextid=u79Ldb

Totally agree with this take on the Brazos County Tax vote
Vinewood_03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can someone explain to me what's at stake here like I'm a 4yr old? Know it's about property taxes but always seems there's a slight of hand move that has me ends up paying more than I did the prior year…..

TIA
atm86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Judge Peters needs to leave, as does Nancy Berry. Neither one wants to negotiate any type of compromise. Judge Peters acting all amazed that Ford and Aldrich are doing the only thing they can to stop an abuse of authority by the other members. The good ol' boys network needs to be disbanded.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
atm86 said:

Judge Peters needs to leave, as does Nancy Berry. Neither one wants to negotiate any type of compromise. Judge Peters acting all amazed that Ford and Aldrich are doing the only thing they can to stop an abuse of authority by the other members. The good ol' boys network needs to be disbanded.
Abuse of authority? I would say majority vote rules. 3 to 2. That's how democracy works.

Compromise is good. Have Ford and Aldrich proposed one?
deh40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

atm86 said:

Judge Peters needs to leave, as does Nancy Berry. Neither one wants to negotiate any type of compromise. Judge Peters acting all amazed that Ford and Aldrich are doing the only thing they can to stop an abuse of authority by the other members. The good ol' boys network needs to be disbanded.
Abuse of authority? I would say majority vote rules. 3 to 2. That's how democracy works.

Compromise is good. Have Ford and Aldrich proposed one?
Yes
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
deh40 said:

lost my dog said:

atm86 said:

Judge Peters needs to leave, as does Nancy Berry. Neither one wants to negotiate any type of compromise. Judge Peters acting all amazed that Ford and Aldrich are doing the only thing they can to stop an abuse of authority by the other members. The good ol' boys network needs to be disbanded.
Abuse of authority? I would say majority vote rules. 3 to 2. That's how democracy works.

Compromise is good. Have Ford and Aldrich proposed one?
Yes
A compromise would be between what Peters, Berry and Cauley proposed and the zero increase Ford and Aldrich proposed. So far I haven't heard one.

If I missed something, I apologize.
Hornbeck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From what I read, yes. The other folks didn't like it. The 3 want to add to that $80m fund, is my opinion. Nancy Berry was terrible as Mayor, IMHO, and this is a continuation of that.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That fb post is full of emotional hyperbole.

Go through the budget line by line. Plenty of bloat.

Example

2019 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2020 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2021 budget 100s of thousands in the same line item... actual...10s of thousands
Proposed 2023 even more hundreds of thousands

Tell me again where unspent 100s of thousands go and what the end up being spent on.

Also... the post paints the current track as a reduction.

This is 100% false. Absolute "worst" case is no new revenue. Meaning the same bloat as last year, but nothing new.

That's a 6 cent decrease. Ford and Aldrich are willing to compromise at a 4 cent reduction and only allow the rest to fleece you for 2 additional cents this year.

If the majority is willing to negotiate, take it off the agenda, pass the "essential" business. Come to a compromise, then call the question at the next scheduled meeting

Blaming Ford and Aldriich because "we can't hire new LEO" is a sham.
deh40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ford has said publicly multiple times he is willing to agree on something between the no new revenue rate and the proposed 15% increase rate.
deh40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cavscout96 said:

That fb post is full of emotional hyperbole.

Go through the budget line by line. Plenty of bloat.

Example

2019 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2020 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2021 budget 100s of thousands in the same line item... actual...10s of thousands
Proposed 2023 even more hundreds of thousands

Tell me again where unspent 100s of thousands go and what the end up being spent on.

Also... the post paints the current track as a reduction.

This is 100% false. Absolute "worst" case is no new revenue. Meaning the same bloat as last year, but nothing new.

That's a 6 cent decrease. Ford and Aldrich are willing to compromise at a 4 cent reduction and only allow the rest to fleece you for 2 additional cents this year.

If the majority is willing to negotiate, take it off the agenda, pass the "essential" business. Come to a compromise, then call the question at the next scheduled meeting

Blaming Ford and Aldriich because "we can't hire new LEO" is a sham.
Not sure why this response was linked to my post. I just said Ford has offered to compromise in response to lost my dog who asked.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hornbeck said:

From what I read, yes. The other folks didn't like it. The 3 want to add to that $80m fund, is my opinion. Nancy Berry was terrible as Mayor, IMHO, and this is a continuation of that.
I would like to hear why having $80 m in what is a rainy day fund is a bad idea when the county has a budget of $250 m +. The state of Texas spends about $50 b and its rainy day fund is about $10 b. Yes, Brazos county has a higher percentage than the state, but the state has more steady revenue sources.

I'm not convinced the proposed budget is correct, but I don't think $80 m in reserves is a sign of poor financial planning. I hope Aldrich and Ford are trying to make the other 3 discuss matters, rather than just sitting everything out.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
deh40 said:

Ford has said publicly multiple times he is willing to agree on something between the no new revenue rate and the proposed 15% increase rate.
I need to read more. I will look into this. Thanks
deh40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

deh40 said:

Ford has said publicly multiple times he is willing to agree on something between the no new revenue rate and the proposed 15% increase rate.
I need to read more. I will look into this. Thanks
Just one example:

"Aldrich's recommendations would be $0.4435 per $100 valuation or $0.4535 per $100 valuation. The $0.4435 rate would be neutral to the homeowner, he said, while the $0.4535 would support the ongoing expenses included in the budget that was adopted on Sept. 6, but would not add to the county's general fund."

"That would be agreeable, but there is no sense of desire to reconsider," he said.

"My desire would be to find some middle ground that we can agree on, and it would be a 5-0 vote," Ford said.


https://theeagle.com/news/local/brazos-county-commissioners-remain-at-odds-and-absent-in-fight-over-tax-rate/article_27faaee4-33dc-11ed-909c-23e9ee6dc8eb.html


If $.45 covers the budget and they have $80 million already in reserve, why do they need $.48? I doubt many of the taxpayers that will be footing the bill are getting 15+% raises, like the $.48 rate would give the County.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deh40 said:

cavscout96 said:

That fb post is full of emotional hyperbole.

Go through the budget line by line. Plenty of bloat.

Example

2019 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2020 expenditures in the 10s of thousands
2021 budget 100s of thousands in the same line item... actual...10s of thousands
Proposed 2023 even more hundreds of thousands

Tell me again where unspent 100s of thousands go and what the end up being spent on.

Also... the post paints the current track as a reduction.

This is 100% false. Absolute "worst" case is no new revenue. Meaning the same bloat as last year, but nothing new.

That's a 6 cent decrease. Ford and Aldrich are willing to compromise at a 4 cent reduction and only allow the rest to fleece you for 2 additional cents this year.

If the majority is willing to negotiate, take it off the agenda, pass the "essential" business. Come to a compromise, then call the question at the next scheduled meeting

Blaming Ford and Aldriich because "we can't hire new LEO" is a sham.
Not sure why this response was linked to my post. I just said Ford has offered to compromise in response to lost my dog who asked.
not intentional. meant to comment on original post.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

Hornbeck said:

From what I read, yes. The other folks didn't like it. The 3 want to add to that $80m fund, is my opinion. Nancy Berry was terrible as Mayor, IMHO, and this is a continuation of that.
I would like to hear why having $80 m in what is a rainy day fund is a bad idea when the county has a budget of $250 m +. The state of Texas spends about $50 b and its rainy day fund is about $10 b. Yes, Brazos county has a higher percentage than the state, but the state has more steady revenue sources.

I'm not convinced the proposed budget is correct, but I don't think $80 m in reserves is a sign of poor financial planning. I hope Aldrich and Ford are trying to make the other 3 discuss matters, rather than just sitting everything out.
I would say neither needs to be that (proportionally) large.
George Costanza
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Having 90-120 days in the fund balance is both desired and pretty typical.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
80 million is 195 days of reserves on a 150M budget.
or

31 million surplus if your plan is a 120 day reserve

or

44 million surplus if you are looking for a 90 day reserve.


looks like Brazos County needs a significant tax cut!


Hornbeck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As I said in a previous post, $80m seems pretty high to me after we've just come out of a particularly long rainy day with Covid. During the pandemic, Peters and other local politicos forecasted a huge budget shortfall with a drop in sales tax. That never happened. In my opinion, that fund is way too high for having just finished a "rainy day" event and seems rather suspect.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cavscout96 said:

80 million is 195 days of reserves on a 150M budget.
or

31 million surplus if your plan is a 120 day reserve

or

44 million surplus if you are looking for a 90 day reserve.


looks like Brazos County needs a significant tax cut!



Where are you getting the figure of $150 m for the budget from?

The FY 2022 county budget was $310 m. See page vi of https://brazoscountytx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3900/FY-22-Adopted-Budget-Book?bidId=

$80 m is about a 95 day reserve of $310 m
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
deh40 said:

lost my dog said:

deh40 said:

Ford has said publicly multiple times he is willing to agree on something between the no new revenue rate and the proposed 15% increase rate.
I need to read more. I will look into this. Thanks
Just one example:

"Aldrich's recommendations would be $0.4435 per $100 valuation or $0.4535 per $100 valuation. The $0.4435 rate would be neutral to the homeowner, he said, while the $0.4535 would support the ongoing expenses included in the budget that was adopted on Sept. 6, but would not add to the county's general fund."

"That would be agreeable, but there is no sense of desire to reconsider," he said.

"My desire would be to find some middle ground that we can agree on, and it would be a 5-0 vote," Ford said.


https://theeagle.com/news/local/brazos-county-commissioners-remain-at-odds-and-absent-in-fight-over-tax-rate/article_27faaee4-33dc-11ed-909c-23e9ee6dc8eb.html


If $.45 covers the budget and they have $80 million already in reserve, why do they need $.48? I doubt many of the taxpayers that will be footing the bill are getting 15+% raises, like the $.48 rate would give the County.

Thanks. I should probably pony up for the Eagle for info like this...
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

cavscout96 said:

80 million is 195 days of reserves on a 150M budget.
or

31 million surplus if your plan is a 120 day reserve

or

44 million surplus if you are looking for a 90 day reserve.


looks like Brazos County needs a significant tax cut!



Where are you getting the figure of $150 m for the budget from?

The FY 2022 county budget was $310 m. See page vi of https://brazoscountytx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3900/FY-22-Adopted-Budget-Book?bidId=

$80 m is about a 95 day reserve of $310 m
PROPOSED DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURE BUDGET

pg 54

https://www.brazoscountytx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3869/FY-22-Proposed-Budget?bidId=

2022 proposed
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cavscout96 said:

lost my dog said:

cavscout96 said:

80 million is 195 days of reserves on a 150M budget.
or

31 million surplus if your plan is a 120 day reserve

or

44 million surplus if you are looking for a 90 day reserve.


looks like Brazos County needs a significant tax cut!



Where are you getting the figure of $150 m for the budget from?

The FY 2022 county budget was $310 m. See page vi of https://brazoscountytx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3900/FY-22-Adopted-Budget-Book?bidId=

$80 m is about a 95 day reserve of $310 m
PROPOSED DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURE BUDGET

pg 54

https://www.brazoscountytx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3869/FY-22-Proposed-Budget?bidId=

2022 proposed
So you are stating that a reserve fund should only be used to back up the general fund? Not other expenditure line items like capital projects and debt service?

Also, why are you using figures from the 2022 proposed budget rather than the one which was actually adopted?
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's the one I had available at the time.

Found the actual at your link.

To a degree, yes, you only need reserves for the budgeted expenditures.

Debt service and health benefits etc. Are at a fixed cost (for that budget cycle) so there is no contingency needed.
officerfred
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The county receives over $40 million from the federal government but still needs to increase tax revenues by double digits. Give me a break. We should see at least a 5 to 7 cent decrease from the county and both cities. The city budgets have sailed, and they appear content with collecting a record amount of new tax revenue from us.

Bravo to the two commissioners who are still willing to assist us. There has been no critical debate about reducing county expenses (or city for that matter). Sure, we need to pay our employees more, but the notion that the only way to do so is to raise taxes is a cop out. Work hard and examine each line on the budget.


AG81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Vinewood_03 said:

Can someone explain to me what's at stake here like I'm a 4yr old? Know it's about property taxes but always seems there's a slight of hand move that has me ends up paying more than I did the prior year…..

TIA


Yeah, it is complicated. The amount the County collects annually is dependent on two factors, the value of property in the County and the rate at which is taxed. In Texas, those with a homestead exemption can't have their property valuation increase by more than 10%. For those that have game day houses or rental properties there is no limit. Once property values are set, the County sets the rate to generate whatever revenue they want. If the County Commissioners can't agree on a rate by the end of September, the rate is locked in to whatever would generate the amount that was generated last year.

Does that help?
oklaunion
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Good explanation. KBTX is now reporting that the deadline was 'discovered' to be about 3 weeks later than the end of September.
Vinewood_03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes for the most part. Appreciate the explanation.
oklaunion
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Peters, Irma and Nancy must not have needed the budget they said they needed since they wouldn't negotiate a lower rate. Time ran out yesterday and they settled for the no new revenue rate.
Thanks go out to Russ and Steve for holding out for the county taxpayers.
woodometer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Peters already saying that they will need to raise the rate next year to make up the lost money. Maybe everyone should vote for the Libertarian running against Judge Peters and send a message.
Hornbeck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I plan on it.
befitter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nobody likes more taxes. However, not showing up to do your job causes me to vote you out on the next round.
Expert Analysis
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
oklaunion said:

Peters, Irma and Nancy must not have needed the budget they said they needed since they wouldn't negotiate a lower rate. Time ran out yesterday and they settled for the no new revenue rate.
Thanks go out to Russ and Steve for holding out for the county taxpayers.

This… boggles my mind they could not come to an agreement.
I think all 5 need to be voted out. The two holdouts didn't show up when a vote was not scheduled…
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
befitter said:

Nobody likes more taxes. However, not showing up to do your job causes me to vote you out on the next round.


So apparently you do in fact like more taxes. Not allowing a vote was their only recourse to prevent you from paying more taxes when the other three wouldn't negotiate. In response to all of this your decision will be to vote out the guys that held the line on taxes. Makes sense.
Expert Analysis
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They had agendas without a vote scheduled and still no showed. Unless there is a potential that they could still vote without it on the agenda then they should have showed up.
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Expert Analysis said:

They had agendas without a vote scheduled and still no showed. Unless there is a potential that they could still vote without it on the agenda then they should have showed up.


You may be right, sounds like neither of us knows for sure. We do know the other three wanted a tax increase which means I'm glad they lost. If there was a way for these two to do the rest of their job without risking being roped into a quorum on the tax rate then you make a good point. Still it's county government I doubt anything was so urgent that the three refusing to negotiate couldn't do their jobs on that item so that the rest of the county's business could be completed. This cuts both ways is my point. It's not like they kept their plans to prevent a vote on the tax rate secret.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.