|
Stafford finalizing bond materials MEETINGS
Supervisors call a special meeting to finalize language explaining details of the transportation bond referendum
by Jonas Beals
Date published: 10/16/2008
by Jonas Beals
Stafford County supervisors need to agree on language explaining the upcoming transportation bond referendum. Chairman George Schwartz has called a special meeting to make some final adjustments tonight.
At issue is a paragraph detailing how the county will pay for the debt service on the $70 million bond authorization, should it pass.
The original language was taken from the failed 2006 transportation bond referendum and referenced a potential tax rate increase to repay the debt. Supervisors initially removed references to a tax rate increase.
Instead, board members listed five funding sources that are projected to pay for the debt service: the Business, Professional, Occupational License tax; state recordation tax; gasoline sales tax; interest earnings; and transportation impact fees.
At a Board of Supervisors meeting last week, Supervisor Paul Milde advocated restoring language suggesting a tax increase would be possible, should those specific revenue streams be insufficient.
Supervisor Bob Woodson supported Milde's suggestion, but the two failed to sway other members at the time.
The issue is still alive, however, and the uncertainty has kept staff from printing a brochure needed to inform the public. The special meeting was called to make final edits before the first scheduled public information meeting on the referendum.
"It's truth in advertising," Milde said. "Telling people what the debt service will be in terms of the tax rate gives them an honest point of view. It doesn't mean that taxes will go up, but we can't tell people there's no chance they won't."
Schwartz agrees with Milde in principle and doesn't think it will take long to iron out the details.
"In the scheme of things, it's just a line or two in one paragraph," he said.
"The current revenue projections indicate that the debt service could be paid for with transportation funds," Supervisor Joe Brito said. "But we'll have to put some sort of disclaimer in there. We can't control the actions of future boards."
Meanwhile, supervisors are taking a closer look at one source of transportation fund revenues. When the board passed the BPOL tax in July, they also unanimously passed a motion resolving that all BPOL revenues be dedicated to the transportation fund.
Stafford County officials will hold three public-information meetings on the transportation bond referendum that will be on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Tonight at 7, Board of Supervisors Chambers, Stafford Administration Center, 1300 Courthouse Road
Oct. 22, 7 p.m., Park Ridge Elementary School, 2000 Parkway Blvd.
Oct. 28, 7 p.m., Berea Fire and Rescue Station, 20 Sebring Way |
|
Read more stories about Stafford
Date published: 10/16/2008
Most recent reader comments:
Stafford BOS is not fully upfront - Taxes WILL rise
(posted by
WeimCity
, Oct. 16, 2008 9:20 pm)
I really wish Stafford BOS were truthful when trying to push this so called Transportation Bond. Transportation is the Commonwealth's obligation and Richmond should be held accountable and not the local government. Stafford also has to start paying for the Crow's Nest folly and where is that payment coming from? .The fire department also has moved from a volunteer based to a paid unit - this will require more money, courts need more money, police need more moner and where will it come from?
Transportation funding is in place
(posted by
MisterB
, Oct. 16, 2008 11:59 am)
The Transportation Bond will not impact Real Estate taxes or impact school, park or Fire and Rescue funding. The Bonds will be 100% paid for from the revenue in the transportation fund.The BOS has finally come up with a sensible transportation funding plan that does not reach into the citizens pockets
Not full BPOL and No blank Check
(posted by
DeanFetterolf
, Oct. 16, 2008 10:59 am)
"If fully imposed, the BPOL could bring in up to $7.8 million a year, according to the commissioner of revenue's office." But that is not what was approved. 1/2 the allowable rate with $200K in exemptions and threshold earnings dropped the real revenue to something like $2.3M Does the BOS expect citizens to approve a blank check for something that they don't tell us how much it will cost and how taxpayers will pay for it. That did not work last time!
|
Star Directory
