[A. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
GOOD EVENING. TODAY IS MAY THE 6TH OF 2025. IT'S NOW 6 P.M.
AND IT'S TIME FOR OUR BUDGET WORK SESSION. MRS. KNOTT, WOULD YOU MIND CALLING THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. BROWN. HERE. MRS. WAYMACK HERE. MR. COX HERE.
MR. PUGH HERE. MR. WEBB HERE. THE NEXT THING WE HAVE IS I WILL DO THE BOARD'S INVOCATION, AND THEN MR. WEBB WILL DO OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME TO YOU AGAIN JUST TO SAY THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO MEET HERE THIS EVENING AND CARRY ON THE MATTERS FOR THE COUNTY OF PRINCE GEORGE.
HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR DIRECTION TONIGHT AS WE DISCUSS SEVERAL IMPORTANT MATTERS THAT WILL AFFECT THE RESIDENTS HERE IN THE COUNTY, AS WELL AS EVERYONE. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK YOU TO WRAP YOUR LOVING ARMS OF PROTECTION AROUND ALL OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FOLKS, OUR FIRE, EMS, OUR POLICE, AND ALL OF THOSE THAT ARE IN HARM'S DANGER EACH AND EVERY DAY.
AND HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK YOU FOR ALL OF THIS IN IN YOUR NAME, AMEN.
AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU, MR. WEBB. NEXT ITEM IS THE ADOPTION OF OUR AGENDA.
AND BEFORE I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA, THERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADD.
WE HAVE FIVE LET'S SEE FIVE ITEMS SO FAR. NUMBER SIX WOULD BE IS TO SET A ANOTHER BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING FOR MAY THE 21ST, WHICH IS A WEDNESDAY.
THAT WOULD BE ONE THE NUMBER SEVEN WOULD BE IS A RESOLUTION TO DEAL WITH EXTENDING THE APPLICATION DEADLINE FOR THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION APPLICATIONS.
AND THEN NUMBER EIGHT WOULD BE A POTENTIAL DISCUSSION AND RESOLUTION ON BREACH OF CONTRACT.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ADDED TO THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
SO WITH THAT SAID I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION PLEASE.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THE ADDED SECOND.
SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. PUGH, AND IT WAS SECONDED BY MR. COX THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THOSE ADDITIONS OF THOSE THREE ITEMS BEING ADDED TO THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.
YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? CARRIED. WE'LL START OUR WORK SESSION FOR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS TONIGHT.
[B. WORK SESSION]
AND THE FIRST THING WE'LL HAVE IS A FISCAL 26 REASSESSMENT UPDATE FROM FROM VISION, VISION GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS.GOOD EVENING, MR. CUNNINGHAM AND MR. MOON. I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO GO LIVE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO. YES, SIR. AND I'M JOHN ATKINSON WITH VISION.
I'M HERE TO HELP BRIAN LEAD THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL JUST HELP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SIR. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.
BRIAN CUNNINGHAM HERE. APPRECIATE YOU INVITING US TO THIS MEETING.
AND WE'LL DO A QUICK PRESENTATION HERE.
WANT TO RECAP A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST YEAR.
SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE.
CATCH EVERYBODY UP WITH THE INFORMALS WE RECENTLY COMPLETED.
AND THEN WE'LL GET INTO THE REASSESSMENT RESULTS.
WE DO A DATA REVIEW AND COLLECTION. WE INSPECTED EVERY PROPERTY VIA THE AERIAL IMAGERY.
AN EXAMPLE OF QUALIFIED AND UNQUALIFIED REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS TO ENSURE THE SALES AN ARMS LENGTH SALE BETWEEN A WILLING BUYER AND A WILLING SELLER. WE LOOK FOR THINGS LIKE LLCS FROM AND TO EACH OTHER,
[00:05:07]
BANKS, THAT TYPE OF THING. WE DEVELOPED THE THE BIGGEST THING WE WORK ON IS DEVELOPING THE VALUATION MODELS FOR THE LAND AND BUILDING.THEY'RE ALL BASED ON THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SALES FILE.
AND THE FIRST STEP IS WE REVIEW AND ADJUST THE APPRAISAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND THROUGH OUR PROCESS, WE IDENTIFIED 92 NEIGHBORHOODS.
AS I MENTIONED, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME DOING STATISTICAL SALES ANALYSIS.
AND WE FROM THAT WE CREATE THE, THE THE EVALUATION MODEL MODELS.
THE WE DON'T USE THE SALES PER SE AS IN LIKE COMP SALES.
SO WE USE THOSE SALES WE DEVELOP EVALUATION MODELS FOR LAND AND IMPROVEMENTS.
WE CALCULATE THE DATABASE AND THEN WE REVIEW THE SALES RATIO BY PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS YEAR BUILT, SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF THE PROPERTY.
A MYRIAD OF DIFFERENT RESULTS AND YOU MAY RECALL, WENT INTO A LOT OF THOSE LAST TIME.
AND THE BIG THING IS, IS WE REPEAT, THIS IS AN ITERATIVE PROCESS.
WE GO OVER AND OVER IT THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT AND DID A LITTLE BIT OF IT DURING OUR INFORMALS.
WE JUST COMPLETED THE INFORMAL REVIEWS WHERE WE HEAR THE PROPERTY OWNERS CONCERNS, WE REVIEW AND UPDATE THE CHARACTERISTICS, AS THE EVIDENCE INDICATES. RANDY HORN'S OFFICE ALSO DID AN IN-OFFICE REVIEW WHERE PROPERTY OWNERS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN AND VOICE THEIR CONCERNS THERE. AND WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH RANDY'S OFFICE, THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, AND UPDATING EITHER CHARACTERISTICS OR VALUES OR AND OR MODELS.
SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE LARGE, BIGGER TASK WE ACCOMPLISHED DURING THIS REASSESSMENT IS WE ROLLED BACK THE FY 25 VALUES TO THE FY 24 VALUES. WE CORRECTED THE HISTORICAL 24 VALUES SO THEY DISPLAY CORRECTLY IN CAMA PRIMARILY AROUND THE AREAS OF THE LAND USE AND DEFERRED VALUES.
WE FORMATTED THE HOW THE HISTORICAL VALUES ARE DISPLAYED IN CAMA.
SO THEY MADE SENSE TO THE THE GROUP AND ANYBODY USING THE CAMA SYSTEM.
WE ALSO ADDED THE LAND USE VALUES TO THE WEBSITE.
WE REMOVED ALL THE OVERRIDES. JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING HAD A VALUE OVERRIDE ON IT.
WE UPDATED THE FY 26 LAND USE VALUES. WE RESTORED THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS PREVIOUSLY REMOVED, AND WE THROUGH WENT THROUGH WHAT ENDED UP BEING NOW THREE ITERATIONS OF THAT PROCESS.
AND WE REMOVED THE VALUES ON ALL THE DETACHED SHEDS THAT ARE LESS THAN 256FT².
WE SENT OUT TO RESIDENTIAL DATA MAILERS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND RECEIVED THOSE BACK AND MADE UPDATES TO EACH PROPERTY OWNERS CHANGES, CHARACTERISTIC CHANGES. WE'VE BAILED OUT THE PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT NOTICES, WHICH WAS WHAT PRECIPITATED THE INFORMALS. AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF MAILING OUT THE CHANGE ASSESSMENT NOTICES.
ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WE DID IS SET UP APPRAISAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
INITIALLY, THIS IS WHAT WE STARTED WITH IS NOT THE NEIGHBORHOODS JUST WEREN'T UNIQUELY DEFINED TO FIT A TABLE DRIVEN MASS APPRAISAL SOFTWARE. SO WE TOOK WE STUDIED THESE BASED ON LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS A LOT OF INPUT FROM THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, AND WE GOT DONE.
YOU'LL SEE, THE KEY THING HERE IS WE STARTED OFF WITH THIS PURPLE NEIGHBORHOOD, 5400 PROPERTIES.
BASICALLY, THEY'RE ALL OF THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL TYPE PROPERTIES.
WE DIVIDE ALL THESE PARCELS INTO WHAT WE CALL APPRAISAL NEIGHBORHOODS, APPRAISAL DISTRICTS, OR FOR SHORT, JUST NEIGHBORHOODS. WITH THIS A LOT OF HELP WITH, WITH RANDY'S GROUP AND INCLUDED THE COUNTY DISTRICTS, PLANNING, INDUSTRIAL ROLE, THAT TYPE OF THING.
[00:10:05]
WHAT THIS DOES IS IT PROVIDES ALLOWS US THEN TO DEVELOP LOCATIONAL TABLE DRIVEN RATES.SO IF THERE'S COME THE NEXT REASSESSMENT, OBVIOUSLY THE THESE THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE REVIEWED, POTENTIALLY TWEAKED. AND WITH THAT THEN YOU STUDY THE SALES RATIOS BY THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND YOU CAN THEN TWEAK THE TABLES WITHIN EACH NEIGHBORHOOD AND BRING THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN BE READJUSTED IN VALUE, UNIQUELY WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALL SAID AND DONE, WE WE HAD CAME UP WITH 92 APPRAISAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND A LOT MORE GRANULAR THAN BEFORE, WITH OUR LARGEST TWO BEING AREA SEVEN. THERE'S THIS GREEN AREA UP HERE, AND WITH ABOUT 1100 PARCELS AND THIS PGPA SEVEN, THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS 900 PARCELS, AND THE REST OF THEM ARE SMALLER THAN THAT.
SO A LOT LESS, LOT MORE GRANULAR WHICH IS ENABLES BUILDING A AND CALIBRATING A COMPUTER ASSISTED MASS APPRAISAL SYSTEM. NEXT THING I WANTED TO REVIEW REAL QUICKLY HERE IS THE SALES.
AND BUT IT'S ALWAYS KIND OF GOOD TO KNOW THAT, HEY, DOES THIS MATCH WHAT THE REST OF THE WORLD IS SEEING? AND THE VIRGINIA BOARD OF REALTORS PUTS OUT REPORTS.
I THINK JUST EVERY MONTH OR EVERY QUARTER I GRABBED THE ONE CLOSEST TO THE END OF THE YEAR.
THIS IS DECEMBER, AS A MATTER OF FACT. SO IN 23, THE SALES WENT UP 5 TO 10% IN PRINCE GEORGE.
AND SO YOU KIND OF AGGREGATE THAT TOGETHER YOU START DECEMBER OF 22, $100,000, YOU ADD 5% TO THAT AND 23 AND I'M TAKING THE CONSERVATIVE NUMBER NOT EVEN TAKING THE HIGH NUMBER.
AND IT'S $105,000 TAKE ADD ANOTHER 10% THAT IS $115,500 OR 15.5% INCREASE.
SO GETTING INTO THE MEAT AND POTATOES OF WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST COUPLE OR THE LAST MONTHS SINCE WE LAST MET, WE HELD 514 MEETINGS AND 632 PARCELS, OR ROUGHLY 4.4% OF THE PARCEL INVENTORY.
CONSIDERING ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE GONE THAT HAVE GONE ON, ALL THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH WITH THE THE CAMA SYSTEM AND CONFIGURING IT AND SETTING IT UP AND TABLE, DRIVING IT A 4% INFORMAL RATE IS, IS VERY GOOD.
WE GET WE GET A LITTLE NERVOUS WE GET NERVOUS WHEN IT PUSHES 10%.
THE 4.4% ON INFORMALS IS IS VERY GOOD. IT'S A METRIC WE ALL, WE ALL LOOK AT TO SEE HOW GOOD, HOW GOOD A JOB DID WE DO WITH, WITH THE THE REASSESSMENT.
I WOULD SAY THE MAJORITY OF, OF THEM WERE HOUSES THAT WERE PICKED UP DURING THE, THE INFORMAL OR DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS THAT OBVIOUSLY WE COULD NOT SEE INSIDE. WE GOT PICTURES OF THE INSIDES AND DECLARED THEM AS UNINHABITABLE AND TOOK THEM DOWN TO ZERO OR NEARLY $0 ON THEM. WE ALSO AGAIN RECALCULATED THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS AND THAT UPDATED ANOTHER 2700 PARCELS, ROUGHLY. I DID ADJUST ONE LAND MODEL, LOWERED ITS VALUE A LITTLE BIT.
THEY'VE BEEN POSTED TO THE WEBSITE EVERY NIGHT AT 9:00 IN THE EVENING.
SO IT'S IT'S BEEN A DAILY UPDATE FOR A MONTH OR SO NOW.
THE WORKING PAPERS HAVE BEEN SENT OUT TO THOSE REQUESTING THEM.
THE CHANGE NOTICES, WE'RE GOING TO MAIL OUT CHANGE NOTICES ON 3221 PARCELS.
[00:15:07]
THERE ARE 45 INCREASES AND 3176 DECREASES. THE 45 INCREASES WERE THERE WERE A HANDFUL OF ERRORS THAT WE FOUND. AND THERE WERE A HANDFUL OF PARCELS BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THE PROPERTY OWNER CONVINCED US WITH INFORMATION THEY PROVIDED THAT THE VALUE SHOULD INCREASE OR THERE WAS AN ERROR ON IT AND THEY BROUGHT IT TO OUR ATTENTION.SO THE REASSESSMENT RESULTS THE REASSESSMENT FROM THE PREVIOUS REASSESSMENT TO THE FY 26, 16% OF THE PARCELS DECREASED IN VALUE AND 84% OF THE PARCELS INCREASED IN VALUE.
THE APPRAISAL TOTALS EXCLUDING EXEMPTS AND MINES.
THE PROPERTY CLASS THAT'S GREATER THAN 100 ACRES.
THE VALUE CHANGE IN VALUE. WHOOPS. LET ME GET BACK TO WHERE I'M SUPPOSED TO BE HERE.
THERE WE GO. THE CHANGE IN VALUE WENT UP 8.5%.
THE AND THROUGH THE INFORMALS AND LAND AND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS OR LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS, I SHOULD SAY, DROPPED TO 23 MILLION $ 24 MILLION. THE AG PARCELS BETWEEN 20 AND 100 ACRES WENT UP 9.2% WITH ROUGHLY 4.5 $4.6 MILLION DECREASE THROUGH THE INFORMALS AND LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIALS AND THE MULTIFAMILY DROPPED ABOUT 2.5% FOR A TOTAL OF $2.8 MILLION. THE BIG ONE, THE RESIDENTIALS AND I FAILED TO MENTION HERE THIS IS THE LIST OF THE OR THE COUNT OF THE HEARING PARCELS WE HAD. LET'S SEE, WE HAD 528 RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL AND HEARINGS.
THE VALUE INCREASE WENT UP 14%. AND THAT'S CLOSE TO THAT 15%, 15.5%.
WE SAW FROM THE VIRGINIA BOARD OF REALTORS. WITH THE BETWEEN THE INFORMALS AND THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTOR ADJUSTMENT WENT DOWN NEARLY $60 MILLION.
ALL SAID AND DONE, AFTER THE INFORMALS AND THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS DROPPED ABOUT $91 MILLION, OR 1.9% OF THE VALUE WE STARTED WITH PRIOR TO THE INFORMALS.
DOWN HERE I KNOW THAT'S THE DREW AND HER HER.
HER TEAM USES ASSESSED VALUES, SO I INCLUDED THE ASSESSED VALUES DOWN HERE.
THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE'VE WORKED ON ON AND OFF SINCE EARLY FEBRUARY.
THIS SHOWS THE CHANGE IN VALUE AT THE ASSESSED LEVEL.
ABOUT STILL NEARLY 14% ON RESIDENTIAL AND YOUR INCREASE ON 8 AND 13 OR 8 AND 14% ON THE AGS.
FOR THE CURRENT FY 26 VALUES, NEARLY $4.5 BILLION.
SO I'LL LEAVE THAT UP. THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
NORMALLY WE FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER THAT LIMITS YOU CAN ONLY SPEAK TWICE.
BUT I'M SUSPENDING THAT FOR TONIGHT, BECAUSE I WANT TO ENSURE THAT EVERY BOARD MEMBER GETS A CHANCE TO ASK WHATEVER QUESTIONS, AS MANY QUESTIONS AS YOU NEED TO, TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE PUBLIC IF YOU'RE ASKED.
SO I WANT TO STATE THAT FIRST. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD MEMBERS.
I WON'T CALL ANY PARTICULAR ORDER. THE ONLY THING I'LL ASK YOU TO DO IS IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, JUST GET MY ATTENTION. SO I MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T STEP ON EACH OTHER WHILE SOMEONE'S TALKING.
[00:20:03]
SO IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO START WITH ANY QUESTIONS? MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. MR. WEBB. YES, SIR. MR. WEBB.I'VE GOT SEVERAL, SO I'M GLAD YOU SUSPENDED THAT.
I TOOK SOME TIME TO TRY TO WRITE SOME STUFF DOWN.
CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY REASSESSMENTS VISION HAS DONE IN VIRGINIA? AND THE SECOND PART TO THAT QUESTION IS IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS AROUND MANY LOCALITIES.
SO IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA VISION HAS THREE ARMS THAT DO REASSESSMENT.
SO 80 OR 8? 80 8 0%. OKAY. AND TO CLARIFY THAT THERE'S A 134 TAXING ENTITIES IN THE STATE AND ROUGHLY HALF DO IT INTERNALLY. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A KIND OF AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT NUMBER MEANS.
ALL RIGHT. STILL ME? YES, SIR. YEP UNTIL I HEAR SOMEONE ELSE.
WHEN THE FIRST NOTICES WENT OUT, CAN YOU TELL ME OR EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT WAS INDICATED TO SAY THAT THAT WAS JUST A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT? BECAUSE BE STRAIGHT UP I'VE LOOKED AT MINE AND I'VE GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT IT SINCE WE'VE HAD THE LAST MEETING.
AND MINE LOOKS LIKE THE REAL DEAL RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WAS JUST A PRELIMINARY OR JUST AN FYI TYPE ASSESSMENT.
UNLESS I LOOKED IN THE WRONG BOX, BUT I LOOKED AT IT PRETTY CLOSE.
BRIAN, CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT WAS SENT OUT IN TERMS OF PRELIMINARY NOTICES? I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY LOOKED LIKE ACROSS THE TOP. NOTHING SAID THAT IT WAS A PRELIMINARY NOTICE.
AT LEAST IN BOLD LETTERING OR BOLD WORDING. THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF VERBIAGE IN THERE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE INFORMALS, THE INFORMAL HEARINGS, THE THE ASSESSORS IN OFFICE REVIEW, AND THEN ALSO THE OF COURSE, THE BOE PORTION AFTERWARDS. YES, SIR.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION FROM MY POINT, UNLESS I'M MISSING IT, I WENT BACK TO LOOK AT AN ASSESSMENT I'VE HAD BEFORE, IT'S GOT THE SAME VERBIAGE ON IT. SO WHAT IT'S ACTUALLY DOING IS JUST TELLING CITIZENS IF THEY'VE GOT QUESTIONS ON AN ASSESSMENT THAT ROUTE, OR THE DIFFERENT RESOURCES THAT THEY CAN REACH OUT AND TOUCH TO GET QUESTIONS ANSWERED AND OR VOICE THEIR CONCERNS.
THAT'S WHAT REALLY STIRRED THE POT, RIGHT RIGHT OFF THE START.
SO BASED ON THAT ANSWER, WHAT IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT WITH YOUR NEXT ASSESSMENT? AND I'M JUMPING AHEAD HERE. WHEN YOU SAID YOU'RE GETTING READY TO SEND YOUR, YOUR FINAL, SO TO SPEAK, ASSESSMENT OUT. CORRECT. YES. YES. RIGHT. IT SAYS IN BOLD LETTERS AT THE TOP CHANGES CHANGE ASSESSMENT NOTICE.
OKAY. SO IT IS SOMETHING TO VERIFY IT IS CHANGES ASSESSMENTS.
OKAY. SO IT WILL BE DIFFERENT IS WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY RIGHT? VISION I'M, I'M GOING TO ASSUME ASSUMING USUALLY MAKES A FOOL OF YOU AND ME BOTH, BUT I'M GOING TO ASSUME Y'ALL COMPLY WITH ALL VIRGINIA LAWS.
BECAUSE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I GOT FROM THE CITIZENS WERE WELL WE ASKED IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE BY STATE LAW, AND THEY ACTUALLY QUOTED THE LAW THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION WHEN THEY REQUESTED, BUT THEY TOLD THEY COULD NOT HAVE IT. AND THAT THAT GETS INTO THE WHOLE THING MR. CUNNINGHAM, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, AND IT STILL HAPPENED AFTER WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ONE.
GO HERE OR GO THERE. IT'S NOT OURS. YOU NEED TO GO TO COUNTY.
AND IT WASN'T UNTIL THE LAST MONTH THAT WE ACTUALLY ASKED MR. STOKES TO GET MR. HORN AND THEM TO STEP IN TO SEE IF WE COULDN'T TRY TO RESOLVE SOME OF THIS.
SO I'M SORRY, BRIAN. GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD JOHN.
[00:25:03]
NO, I, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN CONFUSION ABOUT WHERE THE RESIDENTS CAN GO, WHERE THE CITIZENS CAN GO FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE REASSESSMENTS.WE WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, WANT TO BE CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO DO IT THROUGH THE CAMA, THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE PUBLIC FACING WEBSITE. BRIAN, DO YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT? I KNOW I JUST CUT YOU OFF.
NO, THE KEY THING I WANT TO ADD TO THAT IS, YES, THERE WAS ISSUES.
RANDY AND I HAD A, WE'LL CALL IT A HEART TO HEART ON I WANT TO SAY IT WAS APRIL 1ST, AND WE MADE AN INTERNAL DECISION TO PUT A NEW SET OF RESOURCES IN PLACE THAT CUT THAT ISSUE DOWN QUITE A BIT.
WE DID STILL HAVE A FEW PEOPLE A FEW TIMES WHEN THE QUESTION WAS MISUNDERSTOOD AND IT WAS FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY.
THERE WAS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING ON WHO CAN CHANGE AND WHO CAN ACCEPT THE APPLICATIONS FOR LAND USE.
AS FAR AS THE WORKING PAPERS, I STARTED OFF SENDING OUT PROPERTY RECORD CARDS AND THE SALES FILE WHICH ARE USED TO DEVELOP THE MODEL. SOME PEOPLE ACCEPTED THOSE AS BEING WHAT THEY NEEDED.
OTHERS, THEY DID NOT ACCEPT IT. DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SENDING OUT THE FINAL SET OF APPRAISAL NUMBERS BECAUSE I KNEW THEY WERE A WORK IN PROGRESS AS WE TWEAK THAT, PUT THE FINAL TWEAKS ON THEM FOR THE FINAL VALUES, THAT THOSE DID GO OUT YESTERDAY AFTERNOON TO THE THE 13 PEOPLE THAT WERE STILL INTERESTED IN THAT INFORMATION. SO WE UNDERSTAND WE THOUGHT WE KNEW WHAT PEOPLE WANTED. IT'S UNFORTUNATE WORKING PAPERS IS A VAGUE TERM.
WE PROVIDED PROPERTY RECORD CARDS FOR THEIR PROPERTIES, AND WE PROVIDED COMPLETE SALES FILE.
AND THE PURPOSE IN PROVIDING THE COMPLETE SALES FILE WAS TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT, NOT PICK THREE RANDOM SALES. BUT RATHER GIVE THEM THE TOOLS OR THE DATA THAT THEY CAN DO THAT ANALYSIS ON WAS THE INTENT. [INAUDIBLE] I'M SORRY.
GO AHEAD. NOT BEING SMART. I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT IT WAS IT WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION.
NOT THE FIRST TIME. SECOND TIME, BUT THE THIRD TIME I WAS INVOLVED.
SO FOOD FOR THOUGHT. YOU MIGHT HAVE DONE YOUR BEST, BUT IT DIDN'T COME ACROSS CLEAR.
CAN I CAN I PIGGYBACK ON THE QUESTION YOU JUST ASKED A MINUTE AGO? SINCE IT'S FRESH? HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND. YOU SAID CHANGE NOTICES ARE GOING TO BE SENT OUT.
ARE YOU SENDING ALL NEW NOTICES OUT TO PEOPLE AS THE FINAL NOTICE? OR IS IT ONLY THE NOTICES GOING OUT FOR PEOPLE THAT HAD CHANGES? BECAUSE I PICKED UP ON WHAT YOU SAID. I WANT TO BE CLEAR SO THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHAT TO EXPECT.
SO ALL RIGHT, SO YOU TELL ME ONE MINUTE THAT THE FIRST NOTICES THAT WERE SENT OUT WERE PRELIMINARY.
PRELIMINARY DOESN'T TELL ME THAT THAT'S THE THAT'S THE REAL DEAL.
SO EVEN IF TO ME IT WOULD SEEM I WOULD SEND OUT, QUOTE, THE REAL DEAL NOTICES.
AND FOR THOSE THAT CHANGED, THEY WOULD SEE THE CHANGE AND THOSE THAT DIDN'T, THEY WOULD SEE THAT.
BUT I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY SITTING HERE STRUGGLING WITH YOU'RE SAYING I'M SENDING A PRELIMINARY NOTICE FIRST, BUT YET I'M ONLY I'M ONLY SENDING NOTICES OUT NOW RELATED TO THOSE THAT CHANGED.
PRELIMINARY IS PROBABLY A POOR CHOICE OF WORDS.
[00:30:07]
FOR WHAT WE WERE HIRED TO DO AND WAS DEFINED IN THE CONTRACT, WE SENT OUT THOSE NOTICES AND WE SENT OUT WE'RE SENDING OUT CHANGE NOTICES. GO AHEAD, MR. WEBB, I HATE TO ASK THAT WHILE YOU HAD A FRESH QUESTION.THAT'S A GOOD ONE, BECAUSE I'M THINKING ON SOMETHING. IF I COULD PIGGYBACK REAL QUICK. YES, SIR. GO RIGHT AHEAD. GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR. YES, SIR. WHEN ARE THESE NOTICES GOING TO BE MAILED? THESE NOTICES WENT TO THE PRINTER TODAY, TOMORROW AND SHOULD BE IN THE MAILBOX.
OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SKIP TO SOME OTHER QUESTIONS.
HAS VISION EXAMINED EACH PARCEL IN A COUNTY LIKE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BY CONTRACT? YES. YES. OKAY. CAN YOU TELL ME EXACTLY HOW YOU DID THAT, OTHER THAN WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED, MR. CUNNINGHAM, WITH PULLING THE DATA IN AND USING THE REALTORS INFORMATION AND THE PERCENTAGE OF GROWTH BASED ON SALES? YEAH. WHEN WE LOOKED AT EVERY PROPERTY WE HAVE A, A STAFF THAT LITERALLY ARE ASSIGNED A SET OF PROPERTIES. THEY LOOK AT EVERY PROPERTY THROUGH THE AERIAL.
THEY WALK AROUND VIRTUALLY, WALK AROUND EACH PROPERTY WALK AROUND THE THE STRUCTURES THAT THEY NEED MORE DETAIL, ESPECIALLY THE THE HOUSES AND THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
THEY DO A COMPLETE INVENTORY OF THE OUTBUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY.
THEY BALANCE THAT INVENTORY AGAINST THE DATA THAT'S IN CAMA, ALL REAL TIME.
AND THEY, THEY, THEY MAKE THOSE CHANGES. SOMETIMES BUILDINGS ARE AS AND THAT'S WHY WE DO THE INFORMAL SOMETIMES BUILDINGS ARE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE AS IT IS DISPLAYED IN GIS.
AND WHEN IN FACT IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER NEXT DOOR.
SO YOU DO GET SOME OF THOSE. BUT EVERY PROPERTY WAS PHYSICALLY LOOKED AT AND INSPECTED.
AND ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL TAB IS THE, THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON WHO DID THE WORK. AND THAT'S HOW WE TRACKED WHETHER THE WORK WAS BEING DONE AND IN THE PROPERTY NOTES THEY MADE NOTES OF ANY CHANGES THEY MADE. SO I'M SORRY, I WAS JUST GOING TO CLARIFY ON THE AERIAL IMAGERY THAT BRIAN'S REFERRING TO.
THAT IS THERE'S FIVE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF EVERY PROPERTY.
AND THEN THERE'S A FIFTH ORTHO TOP DOWN. SO WE CAN DO A BUILDING OUTLINE FROM THAT DIMENSIONALLY.
SO WE CAN TAKE DIMENSIONS FROM THE IMAGERY ITSELF.
MOST OF THE COUNTY IS FLOWN AT WHAT THEY CALL A THREE INCH RESOLUTION, WHICH BASICALLY MEANS IN THE PICTURE, ONE PIXEL IN THE PICTURE IS THREE INCHES ON THE GROUND.
SO IT'S VERY IT'S VERY HIGH DETAILED IMAGERY.
I GUESS THE REASON I'M ASKING I'M A PLAY ON WORDS.
I'LL COME BACK TO YOU, MR. CUNNINGHAM. YOU USED USE THE WORD PHYSICALLY OR PHYSICAL? RIGHT. YOU PHYSICALLY USE. THEY USE THE TERM VIRTUAL.
YEAH. BUT YOU DIDN'T PHYSICALLY HAVE ANY BOOTS ON THE GROUND ON ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES THAT MAY HAVE HAVE HAD QUESTIONS OR SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS WHEN THE PRICES WERE EXORBITANT IN SOME CASES. NOW ON ON A DECIMAL. I RESPECT YOU FOR THAT, YOU CAUGHT THAT.
YOU DIDN'T CATCH IT QUICK ENOUGH FOR THE GENTLEMAN NOT TO SEE IT. BUT YOU DID YOU DID CATCH IT AND YOU OWNED IT. SO I'LL GIVE YOU. I'LL GIVE YOU THAT. YEAH, WE DID IT. WE PHYSICALLY INSPECTED A HANDFUL OF PARCELS.
BUT WE VIRTUALLY, THROUGH THE AERIALS, LOOKED AT EVERY PROPERTY, AND THIS IS THE IDEAL WAY OF DOING IT BECAUSE THERE'S, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF VERY LARGE PROPERTIES IN PRINCE GEORGE AND A LOT OF OUTBUILDINGS, AND THE THE ONLY WAY TO ECONOMICALLY IDENTIFY THOSE OUTBUILDINGS AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE THEY'RE INVENTORIED IS
[00:35:06]
THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE AERIAL OBLIQUES. OKAY.SO I'M GONNA QUIT ASKING THIS AFTER THIS TIME.
YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANY BOOTS ON THE GROUND ON ANY PROPERTIES IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY? WE HAD JUST UNDER A HUNDRED PARCELS WHERE SOMEBODY PHYSICALLY INSPECTED THEM.
OKAY. AND I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT. SO CONTRACTUALLY, WHAT WAS IN THE CONTRACT REGARDING THE PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF PROPERTIES? BECAUSE I REMEMBER THERE BEING A NUMBER SAYING UP TO? IT'S AN UP TO NUMBER. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
WHAT IS THAT NUMBER, SIR? IT WAS IT 2000 1500, 2000 I DON'T HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
OKAY. AND SO WE PHYSICALLY DID ABOUT A HUNDRED, BUT YET WE HAVE OVER 14,000 PROPERTIES HERE, PARCELS HERE IN PRINCE GEORGE. I MEAN, IF YOU WE ALL LIKE TO BE MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACKS AND I'M GOING TO BE ONE.
BUT IF YOU WERE TO LOOK BACK OVER HOW THINGS HAVE GONE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, IF YOU WERE LOOKING IN HINDSIGHT, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE LOOKED AT AND SAID WE SHOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY? I'M A BIG POSTMORTEM GUY. IT FOR 40 YEARS WE AFTER EVERY PROJECT WE HAVE POSTMORTEMS AND WE TALK ABOUT WHAT DID WE DO? WELL, WHAT COULD WE HAVE DONE BETTER. SO THAT'S WHERE MY QUESTION IS COMING FROM.
RIGHT. ONE OF THE PROBABLY TWO THINGS. ONE OF THEM IS WE ELECTED TO TAKE ON THE PROJECT OF CONVERTING THE STYLES FROM ONE STORY, ONE AND A HALF, STORY TWO STORY TWO AND A HALF STORY. I THINK THEY WERE OLD AND NEW TO MORE DESCRIPTIVE TYPES.
AND I WISH WE'D HAD DONE A LITTLE BETTER JOB OF TRAINING THE STAFF ON THE IMPACT OF PUTTING CONTEMPORARY ON CERTAIN PARCELS. THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
YEAH, THAT LOOKS LIKE A NEW HOUSE. THAT MIGHT BE CONTEMPORARY.
BUT IN FACT, CONTEMPORARY DOES A INCREASES THE VALUE SIGNIFICANTLY.
MR. NOLAN'S HOUSE IS WHICH IS A VERY INTERESTING AND A UNIQUE HOUSE GOT FLAGGED WITH THE CONTEMPORARY FLAG, ROUGH FLAG, BUT SET TO THE CONTEMPORARY STYLE.
AND SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE FIRST THING. I WISH WE HAD BETTER UNDERSTOOD THE USE AND IMPLEMENTATION OF LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS AND BETTER DEFINE WHAT THAT PROJECT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT.
THERE WAS. IT WAS NOT PART OF THE THE ORIGINAL PLAN TO LOOK AT THE THE GIS MAP FOR THE, THE, THE WETLANDS. IT'S IT BECAME QUITE APPARENT THAT THE WETLANDS HAVE NOT IN THE PAST BEEN UNIQUELY PUT ON TO THE PROPERTIES. WE ADDED A TON OF WETLAND AND OR RPA RESTRICTIONS TO THOSE. I WISH WE'D THAT'S PROBABLY THE OTHER THE OTHER BIG THING THAT I WISH, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, SUNDAY MORNING OR MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACKING.
HOW COULD WE HAVE DONE THAT BETTER? THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SEPARATE PROJECT IN AND OF ITSELF WHERE WE TOUCHED AND LOOKED AT EVERY ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES, AND THAT WASN'T A PART OF THE ORIGINAL PROJECT.
SO DO YOU DO YOU BELIEVE AT ALL THAT WITH ALL THAT YOU TOOK ON FOR THIS PROJECT I MEAN, THIS WAS NOT, TO ME, JUST A SIMPLE ASSESSMENT. YOU ENDED UP CONVERTING DATA THAT WE HAD, AND WE LEARNED THAT THERE WAS DATA THAT WENT FROM ONE FIELD TO A DIFFERENT FIELD WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT OVER, AND IT IMPACTED PEOPLE'S ACREAGE AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED.
WOULDN'T SOME OF THESE THINGS ALONG THE WAY, BECAUSE OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROJECT THAT YOU WERE DOING AND NOT JUST A STRAIGHTFORWARD, I SAY, A STRAIGHTFORWARD ASSESSMENT, MEANING THE DATA THAT'S IN THE SYSTEM IS IS CLEAN ENOUGH TO WORK WITH.
WOULDN'T THAT HAVE SHOULDN'T THAT HAVE TRIGGERED A FLAG POTENTIALLY, WHERE MAYBE YOU PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE INSPECTED MORE PROPERTIES JUST BECAUSE OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THESE CHANGES? INSPECTING THE PROPERTIES DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE ACREAGE
[00:40:06]
ISSUES IN THE DATABASE. TRUE. WE WE ASSUME THE DATA IS REASONABLY GOOD.WE ALSO TOOK ON TOOK ON THE CHALLENGE OF HELPING CLEAN UP THE DATA THROUGH AUTOMATED TECHNOLOGY.
SO I CONTEND THE DATA, WE WALK AWAY FROM THIS PROJECT AND TURN IT.
I MEAN, I'LL SAY TURN THE DATA OVER, BUT THE DATA IS IN YOUR BUILDING AND YOU'VE ALREADY GOT IT.
I'LL STAND THAT . I THINK I THINK THE NUMBERS SHOW THAT WE DID A GOOD JOB.
ARE THERE A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF LOT OF ISSUES WITH THE QUOTE UNQUOTE WORKING PAPERS.
AND I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT WE CAN MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY ON THAT.
I THINK AND I STILL CONTEND THE INFORMALS, THE, THE PEOPLE THAT SUBMITTED PROPERTIES AND THOSE NOTICES ARE VERY CLEAR ON THE OPTIONS. THE PEOPLE THAT SUBMITTED THOSE PROPERTIES.
IS IT EVERYBODY? NO, BUT IT'S A GOOD BAROMETER ON THE QUALITY OF THE PROJECT, THAT WE DID, AND THE FACT THAT KNOWING THESE VALUES WERE ALL OVERRIDDEN WHEN WE WALKED INTO THIS PROJECT AND NOW THEY'RE ALL COST DRIVEN OUTSIDE OF MAYBE A HANDFUL OF THEM I THINK THAT'S HUGE.
IS, AS WITH ANY REAPPRAISAL, THEY'RE NOT PERFECT.
I WOULD BE. I MEAN, IF IT WAS A PERFECT JOB, WE'D ALL BE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
BUT I'M NOT PERFECT, AND THERE'S A LOT OF DATA THAT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT, A LOT OF DATA THAT IS REVIEWED AND REREVIEWED, AND IT WILL GET BETTER. I REMEMBER WATCHING THE PREVIOUS ASSESSORS, HE HAD SOME PUBLIC, A PUBLIC MEETING, AND HE TALKED ABOUT, I THINK, 5 TO 10 YEARS TO CLEAN UP THE DATA.
I WOULD SAY WE EASILY KNOCKED FIVE PLUS YEARS OFF OF THAT PROJECT JUST WITH THE WORK WE'VE DONE IN THE LAST YEAR IN CLEANING UP DATA, STANDARDIZING DATA. THERE'S STILL A COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES, ONE OF THEM BEING THE ACREAGE.
AND RANDY AND I HAVE TALKED EXTENSIVELY ABOUT THAT AND THE IMPACT OF CHANGING THEM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING NOBODY KNEW ABOUT UNTIL IT WAS TOO LATE. SO I THINK WE DID A GOOD JOB, AND I THINK THE DATA SHOWS IT.
OKAY, I'M GOING TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION, THEN I'LL OPEN IT BACK UP.
YOU USED THE STATEMENT THAT IT WAS ONLY 4% OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DID THEIR INFORMAL HEARINGS. I'M NOT GOING TO STAND HERE OR SIT HERE AND TOOT A HORN TO THAT, BECAUSE I'M A FIRM BELIEVER INSIDE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ONE DID AWAY WHEN THEY THREW THAT LETTER AWAY THAT SAID, IF YOU NEED TO MAKE UPDATES. AND I ALSO FEEL STRONGLY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DID NOT CHOOSE TO TAKE PART IN THE INFORMAL PROCESS, WHETHER THEY WERE SCARED TO WHETHER THEY FELT THERE WAS RETRIBUTION OR RETALIATION OR WHATEVER. I JUST DON'T WANT TO HANG MY HAT ON THAT AND SAY, I FEEL GOOD, BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY 4% WHEN I PERSONALLY THINK, AND I HAVE NO DATA TO BACK ME UP 100%, BUT I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DID NOTHING AND THEY'RE EVEN AFRAID OF HOW TO DO THE BOE PROCESS. SO I'M JUST I'M JUST SAYING THAT BECAUSE WHEN THIS STUFF WENT OUT, PEOPLE, AGAIN, A LOT OF PEOPLE THOUGHT THIS WAS A SCAM.
I SAW IT ALL ON FACEBOOK WHERE PEOPLE BECAUSE IT JUST THE WAY THE WORLD IS TODAY.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CHOSE TO DO NOTHING.
BUT AGAIN, THE 4% I, I DON'T THAT MAY BE A DECENT NUMBER THAT THAT OUR NUMBERS MAY NOT BE HIGH.
[00:45:07]
NUMBERS WERE HIGHER. SO I JUST THAT IF YOU WANT TO RESPOND, THAT'S FINE.BUT THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT ON THAT. THE ONLY THING I'LL SAY ON THE 4% IS THOSE ARE METRICS THAT WE USE, THAT WE LOOK ACROSS PROJECTS, RIGHT. AND YES, SIR, WAY FOR US TO JUDGE.
HOW THE PUBLIC IS, IS VIEWING AND INTERPRETING THE INFORMATION.
IF THAT NUMBER HAD BEEN 30% RIGHT, IT WOULD HAVE RAISED RED FLAGS FOR US.
IT FELL WITHIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE TYPICALLY EXPECT IS, IS 5 TO 10% OF INFORMAL APPEALS.
AND SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN BRIAN QUOTES THAT IT'S JUST ONE OF THE METRICS THAT WE USE.
YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT PEOPLE BEING AFRAID OR NOT WANTING TO DEAL WITH THE PROCESS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT OTHER THAN THEY ARE PART OF THE PROCESS. AND WE DO NEED THAT FEEDBACK.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THERE'S THE INFORMAL APPEAL PROCESS.
GIVE THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY. I JUST I WOULD BE REMISS IF I SAID THAT DIDN'T BOTHER ME BECAUSE, AGAIN, WE TRY TO MAKE THIS A TRANSPARENT PROCESS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE STRUGGLE WITH EVERY DAY. ALL OF OUR PHONES RANG OFF THE HOOK, AND OUR JOB WAS TRYING TO DIRECT THEM TO TAKE PART IN THE INFORMAL PROCESS FOR INFORMAL REVIEW. AND I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD EIGHT YEARS, AND THIS HAS NOT BEEN A FUN YEAR.
I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO LIE TO YOU. WE WE HAD HIGHER EXPECTATIONS.
AND I I'M NOT GOING TO SAY I SPEAK FOR EVERY BOARD MEMBER.
I'M NOT HAPPY WHERE WE ARE. I KNOW WE NEED TO GET IT RIGHT.
AND I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THERE'S STILL A LOT OF STUFF OUT THERE WHEN I'M HEARING STUFF ABOUT THE VALUE THAT THIS MIGHT BE WHERE MR. CUNNINGHAM WAS SAYING ABOUT LAND VALUES. WHEN I'M HEARING ABOUT HOW IN CERTAIN SUBDIVISIONS, AN ACRE OF LAND IS VALUED AT THIS VERSUS OTHERS.
AND WHAT'S SCARY IS WITHIN THE NEXT 3 TO 4 WEEKS, WE'RE GOING TO BE WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON OUR BUDGET AND APPROVING A BUDGET COME THE END OF THIS MONTH. SO I'M I'M JUST IT'S IT'S SCARY.
OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE CHIME IN. YES MR. COX, GO AHEAD. QUESTION. YOU KEEP REFERENCING WORKING PAPERS.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY WORKING PAPER? RIGHT.
WORKING PAPERS IS A PHRASE AND I THINK IT'S IN THE VIRGINIA REVISED CODE WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST BE ALLOWED TO EXAMINE.
AND I'M QUOTING HERE EXAMINE THE WORKING PAPERS USED BY ANY SUCH ASSESSING OFFICIAL AND ARRIVING AT THE APPRAISED AND ASSESSED VALUE OF SUCH PERSONS, LAND AND ANY IMPROVEMENTS THEREIN. SO IT'S IT'S A VERY VAGUE TERM.
I STARTED OFF WITH THE PROPERTY RECORD CARDS.
THAT WASN'T ENOUGH. THEY WANTED FORMULAS. I INCLUDED A COMPLETE LIST OF SALES.
VALID AND INVALID. VACANT. DIVIDED UP. VALID INVALID VACANT AND IMPROVED BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED WITH AND WE FINISHED UP WITH THE PROCEDURES GUIDE, WHICH INCLUDES ALL OF THE TABLES USED AND WHAT'S CALLED THE COST LADDER, WHICH IS THE MATHEMATICAL FORMULAS THAT ARE USED TO CALCULATE THE PROPERTIES VALUES.
THOSE WENT OUT TO 13 PROPERTY OWNERS ON 16 OR 17, MAYBE 18 PROPERTIES ALL TOGETHER.
ALL RIGHT. SO HOW MANY PAGES ARE YOU THINKING FOR AN AVERAGE PIECE OF PROPERTY WORKING PAPERS.
THE THE MANUAL ITSELF IS 60 PAGES. NO, 75 80, 75% OF THAT 60 PAGES IS THE TABLES THAT ARE USED TO CALCULATE THE, THE COST APPROACH.
[00:50:01]
AND THE REST OF IT IS VERBIAGE DESCRIPTION IN A RATHER LARGE FONT.SO IT'S NOT TINY FONT BY ANY MEANS. AND THEN EACH COST LETTER ITSELF IS ONE FOR LAND AND 1 OR 2 PAGES FOR AN IMPROVEMENT IF IT'S COMPLEX OR IF THE LAND IS COMPLEX MAYBE IT'S TWO PAGES, BUT ON AVERAGE IT'S TWO PAGES, ONE EACH FOR LAND AND BUILDING.
ALL RIGHT, SO EVERYTHING WITH THE BOOK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SO 60 SOME PAGES, 60 PAGES.
EXACTLY. YES. ALL RIGHT. AND THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS THE THE EXCUSE ME, THE DEPRECIATION TABLE.
THAT ONE ITSELF IS PROBABLY 30 PAGES. SO WOULD YOU THINK 305 PAGES ARE EXCESSIVE? SO YEAH, THAT'S OKAY, BECAUSE I'VE GOT A GENTLEMAN THAT RECEIVED 305 PAGES FROM Y'ALL, AND HE STILL HASN'T GOT THE ANSWER HE'S LOOKING FOR.
I'M NOT SURE HOW HE GETS 305 PAGES, BUT I CAN GIVE YOU I CAN GIVE YOU MAY THE 5TH, HE GOT 63 MORE PAGES FOR A TOTAL OF 305.
SO GOING FROM THAT APRIL THE 8TH, WE HAD AN UPDATE MEETING WITH Y'ALL, AND I ASKED THAT NIGHT ABOUT LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS, AND I WAS TOLD THAT THEY HAD BEEN PUT BACK IN.
AND THEN AFTER SOME DISCUSSION THAT NIGHT, IT WAS A TERM WE WERE GOING TO GO BACK AND RELOOK.
CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS WERE PUT BACK IN? I CAN TELL YOU THAT ALL OF THEM THAT WERE AVAILABLE OUT OF THE 2002 DATABASE ARE BACK IN THERE.
DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF THOSE? WHAT THE NUMBER IS? GIVE ME A FEW MINUTES I CAN I CAN DIG IT OUT.
I CAN TELL YOU IT'S OVER 2100. SOUNDS. SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT.
SO OVER 2100 LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS HAD TO BE PUT BACK IN.
AND A LOT OF THOSE, I'M GOING TO ASSUME WAS PUT BACK IN AFTER WE HAD OUR CONVERSATION ON 4/8, SO HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO HAVE A WARM AND FUZZY FEELING TO TELL THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY THAT EVERYTHING IS CORRECT, WHEN IF NOBODY WOULD HAVE QUESTIONED THAT ON THE 8TH, THEY WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN PUT BACK IN.
WELL, ALL I CAN SAY IS THEY'VE BEEN ADDED BACK IN.
I SPENT A WEEK GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH.
I DID NOT JUST DUMP THEM BACK IN. I PUT THEM IN, FIGURED OUT WHAT WE DID BEFORE.
INITIALLY, OUR PLAN WAS ONLY TO PUT THEM IN FOR THE PROPERTIES THAT HAD SUBSEQUENT NEW INFLUENCE FACTORS ON THE LAND.
AND THEN WE DECIDED TO PUT IN ALL OF THEM AS, AS A FOLLOW UP TO IT.
AND THERE WAS A PROCESS THAT GOT MISSED AND NOT ALL OF THEM WENT IN THERE.
THERE'S ROUGHLY I WANT TO SAY ABOUT I WANT TO SAY THERE'S MORE THAN 2000.
2000 IN THERE. BUT I DON'T RECALL. BUT I KNOW, I KNOW THEY'RE ALL IN THERE NOW.
AND I DO KNOW THAT IT IS CONCEIVABLE YOU'LL FIND PROPERTIES THAT STILL DO NOT HAVE INFLUENCE FACTORS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GIS TABLES FOR WETLANDS. SO I'LL JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT IT'S AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT IT'S A LOT BETTER THAN WHAT WE WALKED INTO.
I'M NOT GOING TO DISAGREE WITH THAT. AND I SAID FROM THE BEGINNING, WE SHOULD HAVE PUT ALL THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS BACK IN TO START WITH AND THEN TOOK OUT WHAT NEEDED TO BE TAKEN OUT. AND I TOLD THE PREVIOUS ASSESSOR THE SAME THING.
BUT WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT WAS CALLED ON APRIL THE 8TH.
WHAT ELSE MAY BE LAYING OUT THERE THAT HASN'T BEEN CAUGHT YET THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MISSED? THAT'S MY CONCERN BECAUSE AGAIN, MR. BROWN AND MR. WEBB HAVE BOTH SPOKEN. WE'RE HAVING TO ANSWER TO THE CITIZENS, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN I GIVE THE CITIZEN ANSWER, I'M GIVING THEM THE CORRECT ANSWER. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY UNEQUIVOCALLY, EVERYTHING IS STRAIGHTENED OUT NOW.
EVERYTHING IS CORRECT. BUT I DON'T THINK I CAN DO THAT.
I REALLY DON'T. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. CAN I CAN I ADD TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID, TOO? YOU ASKED ABOUT THE THE PAPERWORK, BUT WHEN PEOPLE GOT THOSE, QUOTE, PRELIMINARY NOTICES, THAT TO THEM WAS THEIR ASSESSMENT. SO WHEN PEOPLE STARTED ASKING FOR THE SUPPORTING PAPERWORK,
[00:55:07]
IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THEM.I'M SORRY. YOU GIVE ME A 60 SOME PAGE DOCUMENT TO LOOK AT.
I JUST WANT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO TELL ME WHAT IS IT THAT AFFECTED MY PROPERTY AND HOW? I DON'T WANT TO LOOK THROUGH A BUNCH OF TABLES.
I WANT YOU TO TELL ME, WHAT WERE THE COMP SALES THAT AFFECTED MY PROPERTY OR MY HOME? YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE ALL THE THINGS SPECIFIC TO ME JOE RESIDENT? NOT A DOCUMENT WITH A BUNCH OF TABLES. AND HALF THE PEOPLE SITTING IN THIS ROOM, INCLUDING MYSELF, WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO BEGIN TO DECIPHER HALF OF THAT INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S IMPACTING THEM.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE STUFF ABOUT PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO GET THE WORKING PAPERS.
MY COMMENT STILL GOES BACK TO THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE SEEN THE INFORMATION THAT LED TO THAT INITIAL DOCUMENT THEY RECEIVED, MEANING THAT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT, BE IT RIGHT, WRONG OR INDIFFERENT, UNDERSTANDING THAT IF IT CHANGED OVER TIME, THEY THEN SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THE SUPPORTING WORKSHEETS FOR HOW THAT CHANGED.
AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE? THE ONLY THING I CAN SAY IS I'VE GOTTEN.
REQUESTS AT ALL AT BOTH ENDS OF THE GAMUT ON THIS.
ONE THIS IS NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION. AND THE OTHER END OF IT THIS IS TOO MUCH INFORMATION.
SOME PEOPLE HAVE GONE AWAY HAPPY WITH THE PROPERTY RECORD CARDS AND SALES.
SO THERE'S WE'VE TRIED MULTIPLE APPROACHES. THIS LAST ONE IS MORE DETAIL.
BUT IT'S NOT WRONG. MR. CHAIR, I GOT A YES, SIR.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME, THE METHODOLOGY OR I GUESS THE PROGRAM.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN USING A COMP SALE AND A COST ADJUSTMENT SCALE? COMP SALES IS A MODELING PROCESS THAT USES SALES AND THE CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE SALES AT THE TIME OF SALE, AND WE'LL ADJUST THE SALE PRICE BASED ON THE DIFFERENCES IN CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE COMPARABLE PROPERTY.
IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN A FEE APPRAISAL OR THE THE COMP SALES THAT YOUR REALTOR MIGHT COME UP WITH THOSE ARE CLASSIC EXAMPLES OF THAT. WHAT WE DO IS WHAT'S CALLED MARKET ADJUSTED COST APPROACH, WHERE WE USE THE SALES TO DERIVE THE VALUES. AND THAT INCLUDES THE DEPRECIATION PIECE OF IT.
WE KNOW A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 2024 AND A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1950, WE LOOK AT THE SALES THAT ARE OUT THERE AND WE DETERMINE WHAT THAT DEPRECIATION LOOKS LIKE BASED ON WHAT THE THE SALES PRICE TELLS US.
AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S A VERY, VERY INTENSE ITERATIVE PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE THE SLIDE DECK THAT I PROVIDED FOR THE APRIL 6TH MEETING, IT GOES THROUGH MANY OF THOSE MATURATIONS OF DATA. RIGHT. AND TO ENSURE THAT OUR THAT OUR COST APPROACH IS IN LINE WITH THE SALES BY MANY DIFFERENT DATA METRICS. BUT HERE, AGAIN, WE USE THE SALES AS A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS BASED ON THE CHARACTERISTICS TO THEN ADJUST. EXCUSE ME.
[01:00:03]
OUR COST TABLES. I DON'T KNOW, CJ, IF YOU WANT TO ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.THANKS, BRIAN AND HELLO, EVERYBODY. THAT IS A BIG QUESTION FEE APPRAISAL LIKE BRIAN MENTIONED IS WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE A LOT MORE FAMILIAR WITH. SO THIS WOULD BE LIKE YOUR BANK DOES A REFINANCE OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, THAT'S A FEE APPRAISAL.
MASS APPRAISAL, WE WE DON'T JUST PICK THREE SALES FOR A GIVEN PROPERTY.
AND TO, TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THE DIFFERENCE. LET'S TAKE A, LIKE, A RANCH HOUSE.
FROM THERE, WE WOULD INPUT THAT PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT IN A MODEL THAT PRICES OUT RANCH HOUSES, AND WE WOULD GET TEST VALUES SO WE COULD SEE WHAT THAT MODEL WOULD PRODUCE.
WHEN WE COMPARE THE TEST VALUES TO THE SALE PRICES, WE CAN FIND OUT IF THAT PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT THAT WE'VE SELECTED IS IS IT TOO HIGH? IS IT TOO LOW? IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE'RE MISSING? YOU KNOW, ARE THE SALES KIND OF WE'RE HITTING SOME, BUT NOT THE OTHERS.
WHAT ARE WE MISSING? SO WE'LL LOOK THROUGH EACH DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTIC, LIKE A BATHROOM.
BUT IF WE LOOK AT ALL SALES, WE CAN DETERMINE WE CAN DETERMINE THINGS.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN AVERAGE APPROACH. BUT IT'S A CONSISTENT APPROACH.
THIS IS WHAT THEY RECOMMEND FOR MASS APPRAISAL, AND IT'S WHAT WE IMPLEMENTED.
OKAY. SO MY QUESTION IS MOST OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE GOING TO APPEAL OR LOOK AT THEIR DERIVED VALUE OF THEIR HOME OR LAND, THEY'RE GOING TO USE COMP SALES, CORRECT.
THAT IS PROBABLY WHAT PEOPLE ARE MORE FAMILIAR WITH.
THEY'LL TRY TO FIND A PROPERTY SIMILAR TO MINE.
AND WHAT DID IT SELL FOR? IS MY HOUSE CLOSE TO THAT? THE MAIN DIFFERENCE THAT WE'RE DOING IS IF SOMEBODY NOW FINDS A PROPERTY THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THEIRS, IT WILL HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME VALUE. AND WE'RE TRYING TO TRYING TO PRODUCE FAIRNESS EQUITY SO THAT NOBODY'S OVERPAYING, NOBODY'S UNDERPAYING. IF YOU HAVE THE SAME PROPERTY, IT'S THE SAME SAME EXACT VALUE.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF SOMEBODY PROVIDED YOU WITH A COMP, YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE THEIR VALUE OF THEIR PROPERTY THE IDENTICAL TO THE COMP THEY PROVIDED YOU. NOT NECESSARILY. IF SOMEBODY PROVIDED A COMP EVERY PROPERTY IS DIFFERENT.
WE WOULD LOOK AT THAT SALE IF IT IS WE, WE TYPICALLY DON'T JUST LOOK AT ONE SALE.
WE WOULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT ANY PROPERTY. SOMEBODY BROUGHT US A COMP AND TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE DATA, MAKE SURE THE DATA IS CORRECT. IF ALL THE DATA IS CORRECT, WE PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO VERIFYING THE RATES, THE ACTUAL RATES THAT BRIAN PROVIDED IN THOSE WORKING PAPERS.
SO IF I, IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, I HAVE TALKED TO EMAIL DIALOG WITH SEVERAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WOULD GIVE ME WHAT THEY CALL WOULD COMP SALES AND I'D HAVE TO SPEND HOURS GOING THROUGH THEM AND DOCUMENTING WHY THOSE COMPARABLE, THOSE SALES THEY PROVIDED AS COMPARABLE ARE NOT COMPARABLE.
THE CLASSIC ONE I HAD TO DEAL WITH SEVERAL TIMES IS HIS PROPERTY WAS ON THE RIVER, AND HE'D GIVE ME AS EXAMPLES OR AS WHAT HE CALLED CLAIMED TO BE COMPARABLES, PROPERTIES THAT WERE ON VERY SMALL LAKES OR LARGE PONDS. THE AND THOSE VALUES WERE NOT OR ARE NOT CAN'T BE COMPARABLE JUST BECAUSE THE LAND VALUE IS DIFFERENT FOR THOSE THOSE PROPERTIES, I HAD SOME THAT WEREN'T EVEN IN THE SAME ZIP CODE.
THE DISTANCE WAS SO FAR AWAY. OKAY. SO THEY WEREN'T COMFORTABLE.
SO, MR. CUNNINGHAM, THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME PARTICULAR PROPERTIES I'M REFERRING TO.
[01:05:02]
NEAR TOUCH YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT A 0.86 ACRE LOT EVALUATED AT 92.5.I'VE GOT A COMP RIGHT HERE THAT WAS SENT TO Y'ALL, AND THE COMP IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD WAS $50,000 FOR LET'S SEE 3.17 ACRES IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD. A COMP WAS 50 GRAND, AND IT'S EVALUATED AT 92.5 AND IT'S WATER AND SEWER. MY QUESTION IS, INSIDE OF THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, WHEN MULTIPLE COMPS ARE PROVIDED, WHY WOULDN'T THE VALUES CHANGE? WELL, A PARCEL THAT'S LESS THAN AN ACRE AND A PARCEL THAT'S THREE ACRES IN MY MIND AREN'T SIMILAR. I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFICS IN FRONT OF ME, SO I REALLY CAN'T COMMENT.
OKAY, SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS, ALL RIGHT, IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT PARTICULARS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, A FIVE ACRE LOT. WHAT'S A FIVE ACRE LOT WORTH? FIVE ACRE LOT WHERE WHERE IN THE COUNTY AND IN PRINCE GEORGE HAVE THE TABLES MEMORIZED.
LET'S SAY THE RURAL AREA, THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT WHAT'S A FIVE ACRE LOT WORTH? HERE AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO VARY ANYWHERE FROM 60 AND 4 TO 6, 76 TO $96,000. OKAY. WHAT ROUND NUMBERS. WHAT WHAT? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN A FIVE ACRE LOT AND A CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND A FIVE ACRE LOT IN THE PLANNING DISTRICT IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD? WELL IT'S GOT AN RPA ON IT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN BY CONSERVATION.
THEY OF COURSE GET SIGNIFICANT DEDUCTIONS. SO I THINK YOU MISUNDERSTOOD ME.
WHAT I'M SAYING I'M TALKING ABOUT NOT SOMETHING IN CONSERVATION, BUT SOMETHING IN THE RURAL AREA.
YOUR RESIDUAL, WHICH IS ANYTHING OVER THE BASE ACRE IS $4,000 WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD ADJUSTMENT ON TOP OF THAT DEPENDING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADJUSTMENT? WHAT CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? BECAUSE I LIVE IN A CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M GOING TO PAY MORE MONEY.
IS THAT WHAT IT IS? YES. OKAY. NOW, WHAT DERIVES THAT VALUE? BECAUSE I HAVE A SIDEWALK. BECAUSE I HAVE FIRE RESPONSE, POLICE RESPONSE.
WATER AND SEWER. WHAT WHAT GOES INTO THOSE SALES? SALES? OKAY. ALL RIGHT LET'S SEE.
HOW'D Y'ALL APPLY LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS? PLEASE REPEAT THAT.
I SAID, HOW DID Y'ALL APPLY LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS? WE IMPORTED THEM ALL, AND I HAD TO ADJUST THEM BECAUSE, TO BE QUITE FRANK AND THESE WERE EARLY DISCUSSIONS WE HAD, MANY OF THEM LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE PUT ON AS WAYS TO MANIPULATE THE VALUE THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN CORRECT AT THE TIME. SO I HAD TO, IN MANY CASES, SOFTEN THOSE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS.
PART OF THE CALCULATION, BASICALLY, IT MADE THE ASSUMPTION BECAUSE LET ME BACK UP A SECOND.
AND OF COURSE, MANY WENT UP MORE THAN PEOPLE WISHED BECAUSE THEY WERE PROBABLY UNDER ASSESSED.
SO WE HAD TO SOFTEN THAT, SOFTEN THE INPUT OF THE, THE HOW THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS ADJUSTED THOSE VALUES AND WE MADE THE IF THE VALUES WERE GOOD AT THE LAST REASSESSMENT, A AGGREGATE INCREASE OF ROUGHLY 15, 16% ON THOSE WAS USED TO ADJUST SOME OF THOSE INFLUENCE FACTORS SO THAT IT WOULD NOT OVER IMPACT THE VALUE EITHER POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY.
[01:10:01]
HOW MANY ARE YOU ALLOWED TO HAVE ON ONE PARCEL? YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 8 INFLUENCE FACTORS. BUT THOSE INFLUENCE FACTORS, WHEN I SAY 3 OR 4, THEY HAD A MULTIPLIER.IN OTHER WORDS, THEY INCREASED THE VALUE BY AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY INCREASE THE VALUE BY HAVING A LAND INFLUENCE FACTOR? IF YOU GOT ONE ACRE LOT, THAT IS AT THE BASE RATE OF $60,000, AND YOU HAVE ONE INFLUENCE FACTOR ON IT OF THREE, THAT WOULD MAKE THAT LAND THAT ONE ACRE LOT, 60 TIMES THREE IS $180,000.
ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT CHARACTERISTICS ARE THERE THAT DIFFER IN RAW LAND? WHAT'S THAT. I SAID WHAT CHARACTERISTICS ARE THERE TO DIFFERENTIATE RAW LAND.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT.
I USE THE LAND THAT WAS DEFINED IN THE CAMA SYSTEM.
NOW, ONE THING WE DID DO IS BREAK OUT THE PRIMARY ONE ACRE AND DISCOUNTED THE REMAINDER OF THE ACREAGE, PRIMARY BEING $60,000 BASE AND THE RESIDUAL BEING $4,000 PER ACRE.
LET'S SEE. ALL RIGHT. I KNOW THERE'S SOME NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS WERE APPLIED AND IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT ALL LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS WERE APPLIED TO LIKE PROPERTIES.
HOW HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT? LIKE THIS PERSON'S GOT SWAMP LAND ACROSS THE DIRT ROAD.
BUT THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET RECEIVES A HIGHER LAND INFLUENCE FACTOR THAN THE ONE THAN THE OTHER.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? YEAH. EVERY PROPERTY HAS DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF SWAMP LAND OR DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF WETLAND, DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF RPA CONSERVATION OR WHATEVER.
SO THOSE PERCENTAGES ARE DIFFERENT FROM PARCEL TO PARCEL TO PARCEL.
OKAY. WHEN Y'ALL LOOKED VIA SATELLITE AND STUFF, IS IT POSSIBLE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MAP TO SEE WHERE NEW SWAMP IS, OR WHERE OLD SWAMP IS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT? DID Y'ALL DOCUMENT THAT KIND OF STUFF? WE DID THAT AS A PART OF THE INFORMAL PROCESS.
WE DID NOT DO THAT AS PART OF THE DESKTOP REVIEW.
THAT WASN'T A PART OF THE THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE NORMALLY DO.
WE DON'T DO AS A PART OF A REASSESSMENT. OKAY.
IS DOCUMENT ALL THE OR GO THROUGH AND VALIDATE ALL OF THE LAND INFLUENCE FACTORS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE SYSTEM FOR, FOR A MYRIAD OF DIFFERENT REASONS.
ALL RIGHT. I'VE GOT TWO MORE QUESTIONS THEN I'M GOING TO LET SOMEBODY ELSE SPEAK FOR A LITTLE BIT. IF SOMEONE WAS TO COME IN AND DO A INSTEAD OF DOING THE COST ADJUSTMENT CALCULATION AND DID A COMP SALES CALCULATION, WOULD THEY COME UP WITH THE SAME VALUES OR WOULD THEY DIFFER? IF THEY TRULY DID GOOD COMPARABLE SALES, THEY SHOULD.
THEY SHOULD COME UP WITH SOMETHING CLOSE. I'VE YET TO SEE ANYBODY PROVIDE GOOD COMPARABLE SALES.
THEY'RE USUALLY PREJUDICED ON A CERTAIN DIRECTION.
OKAY. THE QUESTION WAS ASKED EARLIER BY ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER.
HOW MANY WERE LIKE TO PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, LIKE RURAL AND SOMEWHAT OF A URBAN AREA? JOHN, DO YOU HAVE A I'M GOING TO SAY SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF A THIRD TO MAYBE 50% OF THAT NUMBER WE GAVE YOU.
SO IT MAKES YOU A LITTLE UNIQUE FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
[01:15:02]
OKAY. BUT A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF COUNTIES IN VIRGINIA THAT HAVE THE MIX THAT YOU HAVE BETWEEN URBANIZED AND REALLY RURAL ON THE SAME COUNTY. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON.HOW DID YOU THINK CUSTOMER SERVICE WAS? I SAY I WOULD SAY CUSTOMER SERVICE WAS GOOD. FOR THE PEOPLE THAT IT WAS GOOD.
WE HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE, THE ORIGINAL PERSON THAT DID THE INFORMALS, AND THAT WAS RECTIFIED IMMEDIATELY. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU, MR. CUNNINGHAM. THAT'S FAIR. WITH WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I BELIEVE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE WAS SUBPAR.
I WILL, YOU KNOW, THE THE FIRST INDIVIDUAL I SPOKE TO, I THOUGHT HELPED ME VERY WELL.
I SPOKE TO SEVERAL OTHER CITIZENS WHO SAID THE SAME EXACT THING.
TO THIS DAY, I'VE NEVER RECEIVED A PHONE CALL BACK FROM WHERE I HAD MY FIRST INFORMAL REVIEW.
OUT OF THE FOUR PROPERTIES THAT I DISCUSSED, I THINK ONE CHANGE AND THE REST STAYED THE SAME.
AND IT'S DISHEARTENING AS FAR AS THE CUSTOMER SERVICE GOES, THAT THE CITIZENS WEREN'T REACHED BACK OUT TO, TO EXPLAIN TO, HEY, THIS IS WHY WE DID THIS, OR THIS IS WHY WE DID THAT.
SO AS FAR AS CUSTOMER SERVICE, IT'S ENOUGH FOR ME.
AND I YIELD MY TIME TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD.
YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PUGH. I'M GOING TO ASK A COUPLE.
SO, ACCORDING TO STATE LAW, STATE LAW SAYS THAT THE ASSESSOR WOULD BE AVAILABLE OR SHOULD OR BE AVAILABLE AT LEAST FOUR HOURS A DAY ON WORK DAYS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND SHARE DOCUMENTATION.
HOW DOES VISION PLAN TO DO THIS? SO BRIAN, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE HANDLED SCHEDULING AND SO FORTH. SO THE THE SCHEDULING WAS HANDLED EITHER ONLINE OR THE SCHEDULING WAS HANDLED VIA CALLING THE CORPORATE OFFICE AND THE SCHEDULING GROUP, AND THEY'RE GIVEN OPPORTUNITIES ON WHEN WE COULD SCHEDULE I CAN'T ANSWER THE THE FOUR HOUR AVAILABILITY.
ALL I CAN SAY IS I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF PROPERTY OWNERS.
MOST I WOULD SAY MANY OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS WERE PUSHING 30 MINUTES.
I HAD ONE OF THEM LASTED AN HOUR. IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE SIGNED UP FOR, AT LEAST AS FAR AS I KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE THE AGREEMENT AND THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE TALKING TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
I TRIED TO HELP AS MANY AS I COULD THAT WERE INVOLVED WITH THE THE FIRST INSTEAD OF INFORMALS.
NO, I WAS NOT ABLE TO GET TO ALL OF THEM. AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT REPLY.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO BE LIKE MR. PUGH ON THIS ONE.
I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE BECAUSE AT THE POINT THAT YOU SIGN UP AS BEING THE ASSESSOR FOR A PARTICULAR LOCALITY, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS, WHETHER IT'S IN THE CONTRACT OR NOT, TO ME THAT THAT COMES WITH THE TERRITORY.
SO MY OTHER QUESTION, MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE IS, IS VISION PLANNING TO ATTEND THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION? BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THERE IS SOME STATEMENT THAT SAYS THAT THE ASSESSOR SHOULD BE THERE.
AND WHEN I SAY ASSESSOR, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT MR. HORN'S OFFICE BECAUSE HE HONESTLY CANNOT SPEAK FOR THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS OR THE VALUES THAT WERE ASSIGNED AS PART OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS. SO THAT'S MY QUESTION. SO WE CAN MAKE SOMEBODY AVAILABLE.
IT IS PART OF THE CONTRACT IF WE WANT TO DO THAT, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE TO COVER TRAVEL COSTS AND SO FORTH, BUT WE CAN MAKE SOMEBODY AVAILABLE IF THAT'S WHAT THE COUNTY PREFERS.
RIGHT NOW MY CONCERN IS NOT TRAVEL COSTS. MY CONCERN IS HAVING THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THE ROOM THAT GO BEFORE THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, AND THEY HAVE A QUESTION. AND I CANNOT EXPECT MR. HORN'S OFFICE TO SIT THERE AND TRY TO ANSWER THAT WHEN THEY, QUOTE, AREN'T THE LICENSED ASSESSOR.
SO I GO BACK TO WE CAN THE WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO KNOW.
I KNOW THERE WAS A MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION NUMBER SEVEN, TO EXTEND THE THE DATE OF THE BOE.
[01:20:06]
WE WOULD JUST NEED TO COORDINATE ON THE DATES AND WE WILL DEFINITELY GET THERE.TRUST ME. YES, SIR. OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS.
I GOT ONE MORE. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD. MR. WEBB TOUCHED ON.
I UNDERSTAND VISION EXPANDED THE CATEGORIES AND WHEN THEY EXPANDED THEM TO 49, I BELIEVE IT WAS.
AND WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY CATEGORIES? YOU HAVE CERTAIN CATEGORIES.
I'M CALLING IT CATEGORIES. THIS IS WHERE WE MIGHT GET INTO A DIFFERENCE ON WHAT'S BEING CALLED WHAT LIKE SUBDIVISIONS OR GROUPED AREAS STYLES OR SIDE HOMES OR STUFF LIKE THAT. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS? IS THAT? YOU COULD, I GUESS YOU COULD CALL IT.
WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION, BECAUSE THIS IS THE OTHER PART THAT I QUITE DIDN'T GATHER WHEN YOU DID CATEGORY, WHEN YOU HAD CATEGORIES OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SAY, YOU SPLIT IT UP.
HOW DID VISION ASCERTAIN THAT WITHIN THOSE CATEGORIES IT APPLIED TO THE PARCELS AND OR THE STRUCTURES IN THE COUNTY? AND I'LL GIVE YOU I'LL GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE TOUCH OFF ON.
BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO GET TO THE HEART OF THIS. RIGHT OVER HERE IN TENNESSEE CHARTERS, SAME HOUSE, SAME PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET WAS ALMOST $90,000 DIFFERENCE IN PRICE, SAME LAYOUT, SAME FLOOR LAYOUT, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS. NOTHING DIFFERENT ON IT.
TO ME THAT WAS A HUGE RED FLAG BEING RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, PAVED WATER, SEWER, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS.
SO THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY DIFFERENCES ON ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT.
SO BRIAN, I BELIEVE MR. WEBB IS REFERRING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROCESS AND HOW WE DIVIDE IT UP.
THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE COUNTY. AND THERE WERE MR. WEBB THERE WERE 92 NEIGHBORHOODS. I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ANSWERING IT.
YOU HAD SOME LINES DRAWN BECAUSE YOU SHOWED WHERE YOU HAD KIND OF GROUPED THEM.
YES, SIR. IS THIS ON THE SLIDE? IS THAT REPRESENTATIVE OF WHAT.
THAT'S A COLOR REPRESENTATION [INAUDIBLE] REPRESENTATION OF THE 92 NEIGHBORHOODS.
YES. OKAY. SO NOW. GO AHEAD. HERE AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT PARCEL AND UNDERSTAND THE DATA BEHIND THAT PARCEL BEFORE. I HAVE YET TO FIND A PARCEL THAT THERE WASN'T A REASON FOR IT. AND IT MAY BE MAYBE A DATA ISSUE, I DON'T KNOW, BUT MANY TIMES THERE'S A LEGITIMATE REASON.
I'VE HAD PEOPLE TRY TO DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY ONE ACRE COST MORE THAN TEN ACRES.
WHEN YOU FINISH UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM, WHAT THEY'RE REALLY TRYING TO SAY IS I'M PAYING $60,000 FOR MY ONE ACRE, AND HE'S GOT TEN ACRES, AND IT ONLY COST, YOU KNOW.
$15,000 AN ACRE. WHEN IN FACT IT'S JUST LIKE BUYING A CAN OF BEANS AT TARGET.
AN EIGHT OUNCE CAN OF BEANS COSTS YOU TWO BUCKS.
A 32 OUNCE CAN OF BEANS COST YOU $2.35 OR $2.40.
IT'S IT'S IT'S A IT'S A VOLUME THING. WE DO THE SAME THING.
IT'S A PART OF HOW WE SET UP THE LAND PRICING.
PRIMARILY EVERYBODY'S GOT A PRIMARY ACRE AND THE FIRST ACRES 60 TIMES THE NEIGHBORHOOD FACTOR AND THE RESIDUAL OR THE REMAINING ACREAGE IS MORE LIKE $4,000 AN ACRE. SO UNTIL I CAN SEE THE DETAILS ON A GIVEN SCENARIO I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. ALL RIGHT, WELL, THAT WAS ONE OF THE LADIES NAMES ON THE 15 THAT I GAVE MR. HORN, SO I'M SURE HE'S GOT IT. BUT I PHYSICALLY LOOKED AT HIM AND FROM THE OUTSIDE I COULDN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE IN IT.
BUT THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. I YIELD BACK.
YES, SIR. SO, ARE YOU STARTING TO UNDERSTAND WHY NONE OF US SITTING UP HERE FEEL EVEN COMFORTABLE? I MEAN, IT'S THERE'S THERE'S THINGS OUT THERE WE'RE STILL HEARING.
I, I APPLAUD AND APPRECIATE THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN CORRECTED AND ADDRESSED AND, AND BUT WE'RE BEING PUT IN A VERY AWKWARD POSITION RIGHT NOW. THIS BOARD AND AS I SAID, IT'S NOT FUN BY NO MEANS.
BUT AS MR. COX SAID EARLIER, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY OF US STILL FEEL COMFORTABLE ENOUGH THAT WHEN WE SAY TO A CITIZEN, IT'S BEEN FIXED. I I CAN'T SIT HERE AND SAY IT WITH 100% CONFIDENCE OR THAT THERE SHOULD BE GOOD NOW.
[01:25:07]
I CAN SAY, TALK TO MR. HORN. I CAN TELL HIM THAT REAL EASY, AND I HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT HE'S GOING TO SPEAK WITH THEM AND TRY TO RECTIFY WHATEVER, WHETHER THAT'S IN HIS OFFICE OR WORKING THROUGH YOU.BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT AS WE GET CLOSER NOW WITH YOU BEING DONE, THE NEXT PROCESS IS THE BOE.
SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, BOARD MEMBERS? MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. GO AHEAD SIR IT MIGHT BE AN ATTORNEY QUESTION.
THIS MIGHT BE YOU MIGHT KNOW THE ANSWER. THE BOE DO THEY HAVE THE POWER IF THEY FEEL LIKE THIS ASSESSMENT PROCESS WAS BOTCHED OR SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT, OR THE LAND VALUES THAT WERE DERIVED THEY DON'T AGREE WITH, CAN THEY? DO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUSPEND THAT FOR THE WHOLE COUNTY, OR DO THEY ONLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUSPEND IT FOR THE APPEAL? I'M GOING TO LET I'M GOING TO LET MISS ERARD ADDRESS ADDRESS THAT AS OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY.
IT'S JUST FOR EACH APPLICATION THAT WAS APPEALED.
OKAY. YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO STEER YOU WRONG. NO, I WAS JUST CURIOUS.
BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE BEEN THINKING DIFFERENT. SO THAT'S WHY I SAID LET'S LET HER.
YEAH. WE GOOD ON TONIGHT ? WE'RE NOT GOOD. BUT ARE WE, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? MISS WAYMACK, DID YOU HAVE ANY? NO. MR. CUNNINGHAM, I JUST HAVE ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY.
I HAD A LOT OF CITIZENS CALL ME AND TELL ME THAT THEY TALKED, CALLED VISION, BUT NO ONE EVER CALLED THEM BACK. AND THEY WERE, EVEN IF THEY TRIED 2 OR 3 TIMES.
IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN SPEAK TO? I CAN SPEAK TO.
I'VE TRIED CALLING MANY OF THEM BACK. I'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET TO ALL OF THEM.
I'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH OTHERS. IT THERE'S A POINT IN TIME WHERE THERE'S DIMINISHING RETURNS [INAUDIBLE]. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PROJECT BE IT RIGHT OR WRONG, WAS EXPLAINING TO 10, 15,000 PROPERTY OWNERS HOW WE DO REAPPRAISALS WAS IT A PART OF THE THE THE THE JOB WASN'T PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK.
LIKE I SAID, I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL, DID I GET TO ALL OF THEM? NO, HAD TO GET, YOU KNOW, HAD TO GET THE JOB DONE AT THE SAME TIME.
OKAY. SO IT'S I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. WELL, I THANK YOU FOR THE UPDATE TONIGHT.
I KNEW THIS WOULD BE THE LONGEST PART OF OUR MEETING.
BUT THE END IS WE HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT. THIS IS NOT A CHOICE.
WE HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT BECAUSE THIS IS THE LINE IN THE SAND FOR US GOING FORWARD.
SO ANYTHING ELSE FROM ANY BOARD MEMBERS? I'M GOOD.
ALL RIGHT SIR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU EVERYONE. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER TWO. THIS IS THE REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE UPDATES.
AND I BELIEVE THE NEXT PARTS ARE FROM MISS DREWRY.
YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, MR. STOKE AND MR. ERARD AND ALL ASSEMBLED. I HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION THAT COVERS THE MAJORITY OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA TOPICS. AND THEN I HAVE A SPREADSHEET. IMAGINE THAT THAT I WILL COVER WITH YOU TOWARDS THE END.
AND I WILL PROBABLY BE EMAILING YOU A SPREADSHEET BY FRIDAY FOR YOU TO MAKE SOME CHOICES FOR SOME REDUCTIONS TO THE BUDGET PRIOR TO ADOPTION. SO I WILL GET RIGHT INTO THE POWERPOINT.
SO, SO YOU JUST RECEIVED AN UPDATE FROM VISION GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS, AND YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS DID DECLINE FROM THE ESTIMATES THAT WERE PROVIDED IN FEBRUARY OF 2025 TO DO OUR INTRODUCED BUDGET.
[01:30:07]
THE THE VALUES DID DROP AFTER THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY VISION GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS AND IN COOPERATION WITH OUR ASSESSOR'S OFFICE. SO THIS SHOWS YOU A COMPARISON OF HOW WE TAKE THEIR NUMBERS. WE DO ADD IN DISCOVERY AND NEW CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES TO OUR CLASS CLASSIFICATIONS.AND THEN WE DETERMINE THE CHANGE FROM OUR PREVIOUS LAND BOOK AND BACK OUT CONSTRUCTION, DISCOVERY AND NEW PARCELS TO DETERMINE THE MARKET VALUE INCREASE FROM THE REASSESSMENT PROCESS.
AND AS YOU KNOW, WE DID ADVERTISE AN EQUALIZATION RATE OF $0.73.
THE VALUE OF THE PENNY WAS INITIALLY DETERMINED TO BE ABOUT $420,000.
THEY HAD ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS TO MAKE. SO WE DID GET THESE EARLY YESTERDAY MORNING.
I REENTERED THOSE NUMBERS INTO THE FORMAT THAT WE USE.
AND THE EQUALIZATION RATE IS ACTUALLY A PENNY HIGHER WITH THAT DECLINE IN VALUE AND THE EFFECTIVE TAX INCREASE IS $0.08 RATHER THAN $0.09 AND IS 10.8% RATHER THAN THE 12.3% THAT WAS ADVERTISED.
THE INTRODUCED BUDGET DID LEAVE THE TAX RATE AT $0.82 TO FUND A NUMBER OF INITIATIVES.
AND AGAIN THE REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT WAS SET ASIDE OR, OR THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WAS RELIEVED OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PERFORMING AN ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT IN 2024. SO THIS GROWTH DOES REPRESENT TWO YEARS OF GROWTH.
FOLKS THAT DID NOT MAKE A CHANGE LAST YEAR THEIR THEIR BILL FOR FY 25, THE SECOND INSTALLMENT OF WHICH IS DUE JUNE 5TH, PROBABLY MIRRORS THE BILL THAT THEY RECEIVED IN FY 2024.
SO AGAIN, THE INTRODUCED BUDGET INCLUDED AN INCREASE IN REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES OF ABOUT $4.2 MILLION WHICH WAS ABOUT A 13.6% INCREASE IN THAT REVENUE LINE ITEM. THAT IS OUR LARGEST GENERAL FUND REVENUE SOURCE.
AS THE BOARD IS AWARE, THE VALUE OF PENNY AS INTRODUCED WAS $420,000, AND THE EQUALIZATION RATE WAS $0.09 P ENNIES LOWER THAN THE $0.82 AT $0.73. THE MAY 5TH UPDATES SHOW A DECLINE IN VALUES THAT WILL ULTIMATELY RESULT IN A DROP OF REVENUES FROM WHAT WAS INTRODUCED. IT IS STILL AN INCREASE TO THE REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE STREAM, BUT INSTEAD OF A $4.2 MILLION GROWTH, IT IS JUST OVER $3.6.
SO IT IS $585,000 LESS THAN WHAT WE HAD INCLUDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET.
THE VALUE OF A PENNY WILL DROP BY $4,000 TO $416,000, AND THE EQUALIZATION RATE AGAIN CLIMBED A PENNY TO $0.74. AND KEEPING THE REAL ESTATE TAX RATE AT $0.82.
AGAIN, TOTAL REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE FOR FY 2026 IS $34,365,000, WHICH IS STILL AN INCREASE. IT'S AN INCREASE OF $3.615 MILLION OVER YOUR CURRENT YEAR ADOPTED BUDGET.
SO THAT JUST SHOWS YOU A LOT OF INFORMATION IN ONE SLIDE.
SO WE DID GET A SUGGESTION SUGGESTION AND IT WAS A GOOD SUGGESTION TO SHOW WHAT THAT IMPACT MEANS TO PROPERTY OWNERS OR REAL PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THIS IS IN NO WAY INTENDED TO SHOW ANY INDIVIDUAL WHAT THEIR INCREASE IN TAXES WILL BE.
IT IS JUST USING AN AVERAGE. IT IS USING A PERCENT AVERAGE.
THE ITEMS TO THE LEFT THAT HAVE THAT BLUE SHADING SHOW ON AVERAGE, IF YOUR REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT GREW BY 12.3%, IF YOU HAD AN INITIAL VALUE THIS YEAR OF $300,000 AND YOUR ASSESSMENT GREW BY 12.3%, YOU WOULD PAY $303 MORE IN TAXES, OR $25.22 PER MONTH.
[01:35:07]
OR $33.62. IF YOU HAD A VALUE OF $500,000 AND IT CLIMBED BY 12%, YOU'D PAY $504 MORE IN TAXES, OR $42 PER MONTH. BUT AGAIN, THESE ARE EXAMPLES.EVERYBODY'S PROPERTY VALUES VARY. EVERYBODY'S CHANGE IN ASSESSMENT VARIED.
THIS IS JUST DETERMINED TO PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE.
SO WITH THE CHANGE THAT WAS PROVIDED ON MAY 5TH THE NUMBERS ARE SMALLER.
INSTEAD OF $303 ON AVERAGE IF YOUR VALUE INCREASED BY 10.8%, IF YOU DID HAVE A CHANGE IN YOUR ASSESSMENT, IT WOULD BE $266 OR $22, ETC.. SO AGAIN, THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE THAT SHOWS HOW THOSE AVERAGE GROWTHS COULD POSSIBLY IMPACT TAXES. AND AGAIN, IF YOU HAD A HALF $1 MILLION VALUE INITIALLY YOUR REASSESSMENT GREW BY 10%.
YOU WOULD PAY $443 ANNUALLY MORE IN TAXES OR JUST UNDER $37 IF YOU HAVE A MONTHLY MORTGAGE ESCROW.
SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME EXAMPLES TO SHOW THE IMPACT TO THE INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER ON AVERAGE.
SO SO THE REAL ESTATE TAX RATE AND YOU WILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING OR A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REAL ESTATE AND MANUFACTURED HOME TAX RATES NEXT WEEK BECAUSE YOU DEFERRED ACTION ON ADOPTING THOSE TWO RATES ON APRIL 22ND.
BUT THE ITEMS SHADED TO THE GREEN TO YOUR TO THE RIGHT OF THIS SLIDE SHOWS HOW THOSE VALUES CHANGED OR OUR ESTIMATED REVENUES ARE CHANGING. I SHARED WITH YOU AT OUR APRIL 15TH BUDGET WORK SESSION THAT THE PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION TAX ASSESSMENT VALUES WERE DOWN.
THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION DOES THOSE ASSESSMENTS.
AND THOSE VALUES DID DROP YEAR OVER YEAR BECAUSE OF SOME TEMPORARY ACTIVITIES ON CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICE PROPERTY THAT WERE ABSENT WITH THE MOST RECENT ASSESSMENT. SO THOSE REVENUES WILL DROP BY $350,000, LEAVING YOUR TAX RATE AT $0.82.
THE UPDATED REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES THAT WE JUST SHARED WITH YOU, BASED ON THE LOWER REASSESSMENT, WILL DROP BY $585,000. THERE IS NO CHANGE TO MANUFACTURED TAX REVENUES.
AND AGAIN, ALL OF THESE ESTIMATES ARE LEAVING THE TAX RATE AT $0.82.
SO FROM THOSE TWO SOURCES, WE ARE LOOKING AT A DROP OF $935,000 IN THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER REVENUE CHANGES THAT I WILL SHARE WITH YOU LATER IN TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION, BUT THIS JUST GIVES YOU THOSE THREE TAX SOURCES THAT USE YOUR REAL ESTATE TAX RATE TO DETERMINE THE REVENUES. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE OR THE TWO PRIOR BEFORE WE MOVE? ANY QUESTIONS ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER? I THINK I THINK WE'RE GOOD AT THIS TIME MA'AM.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THERE WAS NOT OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE ANY OTHER SIGNIFICANT REVENUE SOURCES ABOVE THOSE AMOUNTS THAT WE HAD INCLUDED IN YOUR INTRODUCED BUDGET.
I TOUCHED BASE WITH THE TREASURER TODAY AND THOSE BILLS SHOULD BE OUT BY THE END OF THE WEEK.
BASED ON THE FINAL BOOK, AGAIN, THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUES.
I BELIEVE, MR. PUGH, YOU ASKED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE ESTABLISHING THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX RATE, IF THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX VALUES HAD INCREASED AND OVERALL, THE BOTTOM NUMBER SHADED IN GREEN JUST ABOVE THE NUMBER OF RECORDS, SHOWS YOU THAT THE VALUE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX TAXES ACTUALLY DECLINED BY OVER $1.65 MILLION. MOTOR VEHICLES REMAINED ESSENTIALLY FLAT.
PROBABLY BECAUSE OF NEW PURCHASES, TRADE INS, ETC.
BUT THEY REMAINED ESSENTIALLY FLAT 0.03% CHANGE.
THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS YOU THE TAX IMPACT AGAIN PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUES JUST USING 100% CALC ON
[01:40:06]
THIS DOCUMENT SHOWS THAT TAX COLLECTIONS OR BILLS WILL BE $71,000 LESS THAN THEY WERE LAST SPRING FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES. AND MOTOR VEHICLE TAXES WILL BE WITHIN $4,000 OF OF WHAT THEY WERE LAST SPRING.SO AGAIN, NO OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE ESTIMATED PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.
WE DID LEAVE THAT LEVEL WITH YOUR CURRENT YEAR ADOPTED BUDGET AT $12.55 MILLION.
ANY QUESTIONS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY? I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
OKAY. SO STATE REVENUES, WE DO HAVE A FEW UPDATES WITH STATE REVENUES.
HOUSE BILL 599, WHICH IS STATE REVENUE WE RECEIVE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
HOWEVER I DID EMAIL YESTERDAY AND GOT A RESPONSE THAT WITH THE BUDGET HAVING BEEN SIGNED LAST WEEK, LOCALITIES WILL SEE LEVEL FUNDING OR FUNDING AT THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT THAT WE ARE RECEIVING THIS YEAR.
SO THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF DISAPPOINTING NEWS.
WE WILL BE LEAVING THAT REVENUE STREAM AT $1,166,604 THE SAME AMOUNT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR INTRODUCED BUDGET AND THE AMENDED BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR. SO WE DID GET SOME NEWS FROM THE COMPENSATION BOARD.
THE EMAIL CAME OUT AND I BELIEVE THEIR SYSTEM WAS UPDATED AFTER 11:00 PM ON MAY 1ST.
WE CYCLED OR LOOKED THROUGH THAT INFORMATION CAREFULLY YESTERDAY.
I DID NOT GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT ON FRIDAY, BUT ON YESTERDAY WE DETERMINED THAT NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WERE INCLUDED FOR EXISTING PERSONNEL AS FAR AS THE COMP BOARD GOES, BUT AN ADDITIONAL POSITION AND A HALF WAS FUNDED.
AN ADDITIONAL DEPUTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK WAS FUNDED FOR THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, MISS EDWARDS, WE WILL RECEIVE A STATE FUNDING INCREASE, WHICH I'LL SHARE THE DETAILS OF LATER.
AND THERE IS A LOCAL COMPONENT TO ADDING THAT POSITION.
WE ALSO RECEIVED A .5 POSITION INCREASE WITHIN THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
CURRENTLY THIS YEAR THE COMP BOARD IS PROVIDING .5 OR PART TIME FUNDING FOR ONE ASSISTANT COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY, ONE ATTORNEY WITHIN MISS FIERRO'S OFFICE. EVEN THOUGH WE ARE EMPLOYING A FULL TIME POSITION, WE GET FUNDING FOR HALF A POSITION. THE REST IS LOCAL PLUS THE SUPPLEMENT.
THEY DID PROVIDE FULL TIME FUNDING FOR THAT POSITION THAT IS CURRENTLY LOCALLY FULL TIME ANYWAY.
SO I HAVE THOSE NUMBERS TO SHARE WITH YOU A LITTLE BIT LATER ON, BUT SHE WOULD LIKE TO RESUBMIT THAT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT SHE WILL SEE AN INCREASE IN STATE FUNDING FOR HER OFFICE.
THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO REPORT FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, AND ANY CHANGES THAT WE END UP MAKING ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE COULD REDUCE REVENUE IF EXPENDITURES ARE REDUCED. MISS JUDGE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES REVENUE IS EXPENDITURE DRIVEN.
VICTIM WITNESS GRANT FUNDING. WE WILL SEE AN INCREASE IN THAT GRANT FUNDING.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO INCREASE EXPENDITURES BY THE SAME AMOUNT.
SO THOSE ARE THE STATE UPDATES THAT I HAVE. THIS IS DIFFICULT TO SEE.
I WILL COVER THIS IN THE SPREADSHEET IN SPREADSHEET FORM TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO SEE.
[01:45:01]
THERE WILL BE AN INCREASE IN ESTIMATED MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX.THE COMP BOARD INFORMATION THAT I SHARED WITH YOU AT OUR LAST WORK SESSION.
NO CHANGE TO POLICE HOUSE BILL 599. NO CHANGE TO SOCIAL SERVICES WITHOUT CHANGING EXPENDITURES.
SO REVENUES NET DECREASE IN REVENUES OF $673,000 OR GENERAL FUND REVENUES.
EXPENDITURES AGAIN, I WILL SHOW THE EXPENDITURE IN A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO SEE SPREADSHEET FORMAT.
BUT WE ARE REQUIRED TO CHANGE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES BECAUSE REVENUES CHANGED.
BUT BASICALLY THE BOTTOM LINE IS IF YOU FUND MISS FIERRO'S REQUEST FOR THAT ADMINISTRATIVE PERSON, YOU WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BY OVER $748,000.
IF YOU DID NOT FUND THAT PART TIME POSITION, IT WOULD BE NEARLY $726,000.
BUT THINGS TO CONSIDER TO MAKE THOSE REQUIRED REDUCTIONS TO BALANCE TO LOWER REVENUES COULD BE REDUCING TO SOME EXTENT THE INCREASE TO SCHOOLS, ELIMINATING SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL POSITIONS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET, ELIMINATING SOME OF THE REQUESTED RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED, PERHAPS SCALING BACK THE NON PUBLIC SAFETY COST OF LIVING INCREASE AND PUBLIC SAFETY MARKET INCREASE.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR FIRE AND POLICE. AND THEN OF COURSE YOU DO HAVE GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY.
AND TO FUND THE LOCAL PORTION OF THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK POSITION, WE WOULD NEED $29,000 TO FUND THE LOCAL PORTION OF THAT. SO I WILL GO INTO THE SPREADSHEET THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO SEE AND TALK THROUGH WHAT I WILL BE SHARING WITH YOU BY EMAIL BY FRIDAY.
SO SO I MENTIONED TO YOU, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, YOUR INTRODUCED BUDGET WAS $80.1 MILLION AND REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES ARE EXPECTED TO DROP BY $585,000. NO CHANGE TO YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY.
NO OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE BUSINESS, PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX REVENUES.
PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUES. BECAUSE OF LOWER SCC ASSESSMENTS OF THOSE ENTITIES, THOSE CORPORATIONS WILL DROP BY $350,000. MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX WE CAN INCREASE BY $140,000.
THE INITIAL BOARD CHANGE FOR SOME TURNOVER, MOSTLY DUE TO SOME TURNOVER WITHIN THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE THAT I HAD SHARED WITH YOU ON APRIL 15TH WAS $6,190 INCREASE, WHICH DID COME WITH ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES.
NO CHANGE TO HOUSE BILL 599 REVENUES. ANY CHANGES TO SOCIAL SERVICES REVENUES WILL BE PREDICATED BY EXPENDITURE CHANGES THAT WE MAY MAKE, AN INCREASE TO THE VICTIM WITNESS GRANT OF $12,122, WHICH WE WILL HAVE TO INCREASE EXPENDITURES BY THAT SAME AMOUNT TO AVOID SUPPLANTING. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK WILL MEAN AN INCREASE IN COMP BOARD REVENUES OF $51,510, THE COST OF ADDING THE POSITION WILL BE $80,823. SALARY AND BENEFITS ESTIMATED FOR FY 2026.
SO THE LOCAL COMPONENT WOULD BE $29,313, WHICH WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE ON THE EXPENSE SIDE.
FOR THE HALF OR PART TIME TO FULL TIME TRANSITION FOR THE ASSISTANT COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY WOULD MEAN AN INCREASE IN REVENUES OF $52,546. AND THERE WERE SOME OTHER MINOR COMP BOARD ADJUSTMENTS OF ABOUT
[01:50:06]
$570,000. SO ALL TOLD, COMP BOARD REVENUES INCREASED BY ABOUT $109,676.SO SO THOSE TOTAL REVENUE CHANGES ARE RESULT IN A DROP IN REVENUE OF $673,202.
WE WERE USING THEIR PRELIMINARY BUDGET WHEN WE INTRODUCED THE FY 26 BUDGET.
SOME SLIGHT INCREASES TO CRATER YOUTH CARE OR CRATER CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRAINING ACADEMY, WHICH I COVERED WITH YOU AT YOUR APRIL 15TH WORK SESSION DUE TO SOME CAPITAL EXPENDITURES THEY HAVE. THIS WAS THE INITIAL COMP BOARD CHANGE, PRIMARILY WITHIN THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT. THE VICTIM WITNESS INCREASE. THAT IS NEW NEWS TODAY.
WE GOT MORE REVENUE. WE HAVE TO SPEND THAT REVENUE ON VICTIM WITNESS INITIATIVES.
THE INCREASE ON THE EXPENSE SIDE FOR THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK IS $80,823.
SO AGAIN, THE LOCAL COMPONENT NET OF THAT REVENUE INCREASE IS JUST OVER $29,000.
AND THEN MISS FIERRO HAS RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED AND THEN WE.
AND THEN I'VE PUT IN HERE THAT WE WOULD REDUCE CONTINGENCY TO ABSORB THAT LOCAL COMPONENT, WHICH WOULD CHANGE YOUR CONTINGENCY RIGHT NOW TO I BELIEVE IT'S 167 AND CHANGE 167 TO 267.
MISS FIERRO HAS ASKED AGAIN THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER ADDING TO PROVIDE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE IN HER OFFICE SHE SHE I'M SURE SHE WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEND YOU AN EMAIL TO EXPLAIN THE IMPLICATIONS TO HER CASELOAD IF SHE DOES NOT GET ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE HELP.
BUT SHE MENTIONED PERHAPS NOT BEING ABLE TO PROSECUTE CERTAIN CERTAIN TYPES OF CASES IF IF MORE ADMINISTRATIVE HELP ISN'T RECEIVED. THEIR WORKLOAD IS THAT THAT HEAVY.
BUT SHE HAS ASKED THAT YOU REVISIT PERHAPS FUNDING THAT PART TIME ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TO AND THAT COST WAS $22,285. SO YOU WOULD STILL BE RIGHT SIDE UP BY $30,000 BECAUSE THAT REVENUE INCREASE FOR POSITION YOU'RE ALREADY FUNDING IS $52,500 IT'S CERTAINLY NOT REQUIRED BUT IT BUT IT IS A REQUEST.
THE THE LAST TWO ITEMS ON HERE RELATE TO THE DROP IN THE VALUE OF A PENNY.
AS THE BOARD IS AWARE, YOU COMMIT YOU COMMIT TWO PENNIES TO OUR APPARATUS FOR FIRE AND EMS, AND WE TAKE THE VALUE OF TWO PENNIES, DETERMINE WHAT DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT YOU HAVE, AND THE REST OF THAT TWO PENNY VALUE IS TRANSFERRED TO THE CIP FUND FOR APPARATUS PURCHASES NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.
SO THAT TRANSFER WOULD DROP BY $8,000 BECAUSE THE VALUE OF PENNY HAS FALLEN BY $4,000.
THE VALUE HAS DROPPED BY $4,000. SO THAT TRANSFER TO THE CIP WOULD ALSO DROP BY $4,000.
SO THE NET EXPENDITURE CHANGES IS ACTUALLY AN INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES.
IF WE INCLUDE THIS OF $74,977, WHICH MEANS YOU WOULD EITHER HAVE TO CUT IF YOU FUNDED THIS $ 748,179 OR $725,894 FROM THE INTRODUCED BUDGET.
AND THAT IS LEAVING THE TAX RATE AT $0.82. IF YOU CHOSE TO DROP THE TAX RATE BELOW $0.82 OF COURSE, THE CUTS WOULD GROW IN MAGNITUDE BECAUSE IT WOULD IMPACT REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES, PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUES, AND MANUFACTURED HOME TAX REVENUES. SO AGAIN, THE THE ITEMS THAT THAT I MENTIONED IN THE POWERPOINT WERE PERHAPS TRIMMING BACK THE INCREASE TO SCHOOLS SINCE THE REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUE
[01:55:09]
WHEN WE WERE ESTIMATING A $4.2 MILLION INCREASE, WE THE BOARD BY CONSENSUS PROVIDED A $1.2 MILLION INCREASE, WHICH WAS ABOUT 28.57% OF THAT GROWTH. ONE SCIENTIFIC WAY IS IF THE REAL ESTATE GROWTH IS FALLING BY $585,000 28% OF THAT DECLINE WOULD EQUATE TO JUST OVER $167,000. AGAIN, THE BOARD COULD CONSIDER REDUCING SOME OF THE POSITIONS ADDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET. THERE WERE 16.5 OF THOSE SCALING BACK THE COST OF LIVING AND MARKET INCREASES FOR FIRE, POLICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY. MRS. HURT AND I ARE STILL WORKING ON THOSE CALCULATIONS, BUT WE DID WANT TO MAKE MENTION.YOU KNOW, WE WILL CALCULATE THE SAVINGS FROM TRIMMING BACK 1%, BUT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TRIM 1% FROM THE SHERIFF SCALE. TO MEET COMP BOARD MINIMUMS, WE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE THAT SCALE INCREASE AT 3%.
SO WE ARE WORKING ON THOSE CALCULATIONS, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE THOSE AVAILABLE THIS EVENING AS WE WERE JUST GETTING REVENUE OR INFORMATION FROM VISION YESTERDAY. SO JUST TO TALK THROUGH THE THESE ARE, THESE ARE INITIALLY THE, THE REDUCTIONS THAT WE MUST MAKE.
OF COURSE THIS THIS ONE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY IS, IS A CHOICE.
BUT YOU ARE STILL RIGHT SIDE UP BY $30,000 THERE.
AND I CAN CERTAINLY MOVE THAT TO THE CHOICES FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
LEAVING THE TAX RATE AT $0.82 THE REDUCTION IS THIS AMOUNT OR OR SLIGHTLY LOWER IF THE PART TIME POSITION FOR THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY IS NOT INCLUDED.
IF YOU WERE TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE BY ANOTHER PENNY YOUR REDUCTIONS WOULD GROW TO, TO THAT AMOUNT. EACH PENNY IF YOU WERE TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE FROM $0.82 BY A PENNY EQUATES TO 448.340. AND AGAIN, THAT IS A COMBINED TOTAL FOR REAL PROPERTY, MANUFACTURED HOMES AND PUBLIC SERVICE TAXES.
BECAUSE ALL OF THOSE REVENUE SOURCES ARE DRIVEN BY BY THAT NUMBER.
IF THE BOARD WERE TO CONSIDER REDUCING THE CONTRIBUTION TO SCHOOLS, AGAIN, REDUCING IT BY THE PERCENTAGE GROWTH YOU WERE YOU HAD PROVIDED TO THEM WOULD MEAN $167,135 SO THAT WOULD INCREASE OR DIMINISH OR DECREASE THE NECESSARY REDUCTIONS.
THEN OF COURSE, IF YOU DID A DIFFERENT AMOUNT OTHER THAN THAT 167, YOU WOULD JUST SIMPLY ENTER THE AMOUNT OF THE SCHOOL REDUCTION, IF ANY, IN THIS ROW, AND IT WOULD CHANGE THE NECESSARY REDUCTIONS REMAINING.
WE ARE WORKING ON SHAVING BACK THE COST OF LIVING AND OR MARKET ADJUSTMENTS FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES SHOULD THE BOARD CHOOSE TO DO THAT BY 1% FOR MOST, HALF A PERCENT, PROBABLY FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
AND THEN THE RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE FUNDED.
THOSE ARE IN HERE. THOSE, OF COURSE, WERE RECLASSIFYING FOR THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY, A LEGAL ASSISTANT TO A LEGAL ASSISTANT TWO, AN OFFICE MANAGER TO A MANAGER ONE, FOR THE PLANNING OFFICE RECLASSIFYING A PLANNER TWO TO A PRINCIPAL PLANNER, FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MAKING A BUDGETED PART TIME ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY FULL TIME, RECLASSIFYING THE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER MANAGER TO
[02:00:05]
A DIRECTOR, FOR FIRE AND EMS RECLASSIFYING LOGISTICS OFFICER TO CAPTAIN , FOR SUPPORT SERVICES AND FOR THE REGISTRAR RECLASSIFYING A DEPUTY REGISTRAR TO A DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ELECTIONS.THE 16.5 ARE NEW POSITIONS. THE HALF IS ACTUALLY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY CHANGE PART TIME TO FULL TIME.
THE OTHER 16 INCLUDED AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM SPECIALIST WITHIN THE BUILDING OFFICIALS OFFICE, CDCC, A SENIOR PLANNER IN THE PLANNING OFFICE, A DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF WITHIN FIRE AND EMS, A TRAINING CAPTAIN WITHIN FIRE AND EMS, EIGHT FIREFIGHTER MEDICS, AND ONE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SPECIALIST WITHIN FIRE AND EMS. SO THOSE ARE THE ADDITIONAL SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL POSITIONS.
ADDITIONALLY, A KENNEL ATTENDANT WAS FUNDED AND SUBSEQUENTLY PART TIME WAGES WERE REDUCED FOR THAT FULL TIME INITIATIVE. SOCIAL SERVICES. THERE WAS ONE POSITION THAT WAS APPROVED OR INCLUDED A BENEFIT PROGRAM MANAGER SIX THERE IS STATE REVENUE THAT COMES ALONG WITH THAT. AND THEN, OF COURSE, FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT A RECLASSIFICATION OF A LAW CLERK TO STAFF ATTORNEY WAS MADE FOR VERY LITTLE NET COST BECAUSE WE WOULD BILL THAT TO OTHER SIXTH CIRCUIT LOCALITIES.
SO IT WAS ABOUT A $5,300 IMPACT. SO REDUCING THAT ONE WON'T RESULT IN A BIG SAVINGS.
BUT THOSE WERE THE NEW POSITIONS THAT WERE ADDED.
I DID NOT. AND THEN THERE WERE JUST A HANDFUL OF NON-SALARY.
THIS IS THE GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY DOWN HERE.
WE TYPICALLY IF WE GET CLOSE TO BALANCING, WE WILL REDUCE THE CONTINGENCY TO MAKE REVENUES EQUAL EXPENDITURES. $50,000 WAS APPROVED FOR AN INCREASE FOR COUNTY VEHICLE PURCHASES.
TRANSFER TO THE CIP FUND FROM $450 TO $500. WE ALSO, THE BOARD BY CONSENSUS, ADDED A SECOND CLEAN COMMUNITY DAY FOR FY 2026 FOR $35,000. SOCIAL SERVICES WAS APPROVED TO HAVE THEIR STRATEGIC PLAN DONE, AND THAT ENDS UP ENDED UP HAVING A NET COST OF $23,536, BECAUSE WE WOULD RECEIVE REVENUE FROM THE STATE TO COVER A PORTION OF THAT. SO THOSE NON-SALARY CHANGES, INCLUDING THE CONTINGENCY AMOUNT TO $275,803. I DID NOT DELETE THE POSITIONS THAT WERE NOT APPROVED IN CASE ANY BOARD MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT ANY OF THOSE, I'LL TRY TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ALLOW YOU TO ADD THOSE BACK, SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT AMIDST THE OTHER CUTS.
SO I WILL LEAVE THOSE IN HERE FOR YOUR USE. AND THEN THE OTHER NON SALARY CHANGES, I ACTUALLY KEPT THOSE AT THE BOTTOM AS WELL. THERE WERE QUITE A NUMBER OF NON SALARY REQUESTS, $819,000 TO BE EXACT, THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE INTRODUCED BUDGET. SO WE WILL BE UPDATING THE SPREADSHEET.
I KNOW MR. BROWN MENTIONED TODAY THAT MIGHT BE TOUGH TO CONSIDER, BUT EVERYTHING IS ON THE TABLE NOW BECAUSE OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE INCREASE SOME EMPLOYEES WILL BE LOOKING AT AN 11% INCREASE IN THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS ACTUALLY, IN JUNE WE ARE A MONTH PREPAID.
SO AGAIN, WE WILL BE WORKING ON THESE SPREADSHEET UPDATES.
THIS TAB SHARES WITH YOU UPDATED PENNY INFORMATION ON THE REAL ESTATE TAX RATE.
BUT AGAIN THE TOTAL THE TOTAL VALUE OF A PENNY IS 4.48 WHEN WE COMBINE REAL PROPERTY, MANUFACTURED HOMES AND PUBLIC SERVICE TAX REVENUES. AND THIS WAS SHARED WITH YOU ON A SLIDE.
BUT THESE ARE THE THREE REVENUE SOURCES THAT ARE DRIVEN BY YOUR REAL ESTATE TAX RATE.
DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME NOW THAT WE HAVE OVERLOADED YOU WITH BAD NEWS OR INFORMATION? I WILL SAY I KNOW A NUMBER OF YOU ARE CONCERNED WITH WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN AT THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION LEVEL IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS TO FOLKS
[02:05:02]
WHO FILE AN APPEAL AND AND GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE BEEN CONSERVATIVE. MR. HORN PROVIDED NEW CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES FOR US TO INCLUDE IN THOSE VALUES THAT I SHOWED YOU ON A VERY EARLY SLIDE.
SO WE THINK WE'VE BEEN CONSERVATIVE THAT WE COULD HANDLE ANY ADJUSTMENTS AND NOT REDUCE REAL ESTATE TAX REVENUES BELOW WHAT WE'VE SHARED WITH YOU TONIGHT.
OKAY. QUESTIONS? THING ON FRIDAY MISS DREWRY, CAN YOU SEND MY ORIGINAL REAL ESTATE WHAT I FUNDED JUST IN.
YES, SIR. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW IT OR NOT. WAS THAT UNDER THE CURRENT NUMBER WE'RE AT NOW WITH WHAT I FUNDED? DO YOU KNOW? IF NOT, I'LL SEE IT FRIDAY. WELL I HAVE CONSENSUS RIGHT HERE.
SO I BELIEVE, MR. PUGH, YOU HAD VOTED TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE BY $0.02, AND THOSE VALUES HAVE CHANGED, RIGHT. SO I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO WALK YOU THROUGH THROUGH THAT.
CAN YOU JUST SEND IT TO ME FRIDAY, IT WILL ALREADY BE INCLUDED IN THIS.
AND I'LL COMPARE IT TO WHAT YOU KNOW, WE FUNDED AND SEE WHAT WE CAN.
AND SHE DID TELL ME TODAY THAT ONCE SHE SENDS THIS, IF BOARD MEMBERS WANT TO MEET WITH HER LIKE WE DID WITH NO MORE THAN TWO, WE COULD WE COULD SCHEDULE TIME TO MEET WITH HER LIKE WE DID THROUGH THE LAST DRILL.
I'M HAPPY TO. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. HAPPY TO FILL THIS OUT FOR YOU.
THANK YOU. BECAUSE I KNOW THE SPREADSHEET IS A LITTLE CRAZY.
MR. COX. GO AHEAD SIR. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I WANT TO THANK MISS DREWRY FOR BRINGING THAT UP ABOUT THE BOE, BECAUSE I WAS SITTING HERE THINKING THAT AND I'M HOPING WE HAVE A CONTINGENCY PLAN BECAUSE IF IT GOES LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THIS YEAR, IT'S NO TELLING WHAT IT WILL END UP BEING. BUT I DO THANK YOU FOR ALREADY HAVING THAT ON THE BURNER.
SO THANK YOU. YES, SIR. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MRS. DREWRY, AS ALWAYS THANK YOU. I MEAN, YOU'VE PUT IN COUNTLESS HOURS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD DO WITHOUT YOU. IN FACT, I DON'T EVEN WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I DON'T EVEN WANT TO I KNOW WE GOT TO GET THERE ONE DAY, AND THAT HAPPENS. BUT THANK YOU AND STAFF EVERYBODY FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THE INFORMATION.
SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE OTHER THREE ITEMS WE ADDED.
THE FIRST THING IS ABOUT US HAVING A BUDGET MEETING ON MAY THE 21ST.
IT IS A WEDNESDAY. IT WOULD BE AT 6 P.M. AND THIS IS WHERE WE WOULD COME BACK AND ACTUALLY SAY, HERE'S THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO REDUCE TO GET TO THE RIGHT NUMBERS THAT WE NEED FOR THE BUDGET.
SO IS EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? DATE AND TIME.
NEED A MOTION. DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THAT? YEAH.
SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. COX AND SECOND, BY MR. PUGH THAT THE BOARD WOULD SET MAY THE 21ST AT 6 P.M.
AS A BUDGET WORK SESSION. YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? AGENDA IS WITH ALL THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AND BOARD MEMBERS, YOU ALL REMEMBER SEEING A NOTE ON THIS.
BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OR LOOKING AT EXTENDING THE BOE APPLICATION DATE.
IT IS CURRENTLY, THE DEADLINE IS MAY THE 30TH AND WE WOULD EXTEND THAT TO JUNE 30TH, GIVING PEOPLE MORE TIME TO GET THEIR BOE APPLICATIONS ALSO WOULD GIVE STAFF MORE TIME TO WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND HOPEFULLY RESOLVE AS MANY AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE EVEN LESS TRUE APPEALS THAT MAKE IT TO THE FINAL BOE STAGE.
SO, BOARD MEMBERS THERE'S A RESOLUTION IN YOUR AT YOUR SEAT.
SO I NEED A MOTION IF YOU'RE IN ON THIS, PLEASE.
SO MOVED. SECOND, IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND, BY MR. PUGH THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO MOVE THE BOE DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION FROM MAY 30TH TO JUNE 30TH. YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
[02:10:02]
MOTION CARRIED. ON THE LAST TOPIC, I'M GOING TO ASK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY IF SHE WOULD MAKE A STATEMENT ON THIS AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, PLEASE. I PREPARED A RESOLUTION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT IS LIKELY THAT THERE ARE SOME CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN MET BY VISION. AND THE CONTRACT REQUIRES THE BOARD TO SEND THAT OR SOMEBODY FROM THE COUNTY TO SEND THEM A LETTER INDICATING THOSE SPECIFIC AREAS AND ALLOWING THEM 30 DAYS TO CURE ANY DEFICIENCY.AND IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE FOR ME TO EXPLORE THAT FURTHER AND SEND SUCH A LETTER, IF APPROPRIATE, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AT YOUR PLACE.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. ERARD ON THAT? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. I'LL SECOND IT.
ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. WEBB AND SECOND BY MR. COX THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE RESOLUTION GIVING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THE AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE THIS AND SEND THE APPROPRIATE NOTICES. YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? CARRIED. BOARD MEMBERS. I BELIEVE THAT IS ALL THAT WE HAVE ON OUR PLATE FOR TONIGHT.
AT THIS TIME, I'D ASK FOR A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN. CAN I JUST GOT ONE QUICK QUESTION? YES, SIR.
AND I SHOULD HAVE ASKED IT AT THE PREVIOUS MOTION THAT WAS MADE THE RESOLUTION.
IS THAT APPROPRIATE? GO AHEAD. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD.
ALL RIGHT. SO OUR PEOPLE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE IS GOING TO BE DOING THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW? CORRECT. WE JUST EXTENDED. NO, SIR. WHAT WHAT IT IS IS OUR OFFICE TAKES IN THE APPLICATIONS FROM PEOPLE WHO WANT TO GO TO TO HAVE A BOW HEARING. WE ARE EXTENDING THAT DEADLINE RIGHT NOW IS THE END OF MAY.
RIGHT. WE'RE EXTENDING THAT TIME UNTIL THE END OF JUNE.
THE NORMAL PROCESS, THOUGH, IS THAT WHEN THE WHEN THAT OFFICE GETS THOSE APPLICATIONS, THEY WILL LOOK THROUGH THEM AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RESOLVED OR VETTED, THEY WILL VET THOSE APPLICATIONS.
SO ANYTHING THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED THEY WILL TRY TO DO WHATEVER BEFORE IT GOES TO THE BOE, BUT THEY THEY CANNOT CHANGE ASSESSMENT NUMBERS. AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO ASK, BECAUSE I'M SITTING UP HERE A LITTLE WHILE AGO, AND I WAS REMEMBERING BACK TO MY HIGH SCHOOL MATH TEACHER, I'D DO A MATH PROBLEM, TURN IT IN, HE WAS MY TEACHER HE CHECKED, MAKE SURE MY HOMEWORK WAS RIGHT.
IS THERE A WAY, WHILE THEY'RE DOING THIS, TO MAKE SURE THE HOMEWORK IS RIGHT SO WE DON'T VOTE ON A BOTCHED ASSESSMENT? WELL, WHEN YOU SAY I'M NOT CLEAR, WHEN YOU SAY MAKE SURE THE HOMEWORK IS RIGHT.
MAKE SURE OUR OFFICE AND OUR EMPLOYEES AGREE WITH THE METHODOLOGY AND HOW THEY FIGURED IT.
THE THE DERIVED EVALUATION. THEY HAVE NO SAY IN THE ASSESSED VALUES.
MR. HORN'S OFFICE CAN LOOK AT IF SOMEBODY HAS A QUESTION THAT I REALLY DON'T THINK MY PROPERTY IS WORTH THIS BECAUSE THIS REALLY IS A SHED AND NOT A ROOM THEY CAN DEAL WITH FACTUAL THINGS.
BUT I MISS ERARD PLEASE ANSWER I DON'T KNOW THAT NOW, SINCE VISION IS FINISHED.
THE ONLY WAY ASSESSMENT NUMBERS CAN BE MODIFIED IS THROUGH THE BOE HEARING, AM I CORRECT? NO. OKAY. THEY STILL HAVE THE OPTION. I DON'T THINK THEY STILL.
THEY STILL HAVE THE OPTION OF REQUESTING AN ADJUSTMENT THROUGH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.
OF COURSE, THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WOULD HAVE TO GET VISION TO APPROVE IT.
BUT I THINK WHAT MR. PUGH IS ASKING, IF I'M HEARING HIM CORRECTLY, IS FOR OUR ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING THAT VISION DID TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S RIGHT.
ALMOST LIKE A RECOMMENDATION TO GO, HEY, YES, I'M WARM AND FUZZY, I CAN SUPPORT THIS OR I IT'S IFFY, YOU KNOW. BECAUSE AND I KNOW I'VE SPRUNG THIS ON YOU AND I APOLOGIZE, AND I DON'T LIKE TO DO IT AND I DID NOT MEAN TO DO IT, BUT IT JUST I'M SITTING HERE AND I'M SEEING ALL THESE NUMBERS IN RED, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT.
LIKE YOU SAID EARLIER. MR. HORN, COME UP HERE, PLEASE.
BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO SAY YES YOUR OFFICE CAN DO THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU AND OR YOUR OFFICE IN AN AWKWARD PLACE, SO I'D RATHER HEAR.
YEAH, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT. RIGHT. SO, MR. HORNE, YOU HEARD THE QUESTION.
[02:15:05]
R IGHT SO BASICALLY, I JUST WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK YOU'RE ASKING FOR EVERY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION APPEAL THAT COMES IN WE KIND OF.I'M ASKING FOR SOMEBODY TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, TO SAY WE IN GENERAL, WE DERIVE THIS OVERALL, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSESSMENT OR, YOU KNOW, A FIVE ACRE LOT IS THIS I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT NUMBER IS RIGHT.
I'M NOT THE MATH TEACHER I CAN'T CHECK IT. I'M OPINIONATED I CAN PULL A COMP.
BUT AS FAR AS THE WAY IT WAS DERIVED, THE WAY THEY GOT IT, YOU NEED A TEACHER TO SAY.
YEAH, YOUR MATH CHECKS OUT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A DEPARTMENT IN VIRGINIA LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION I'M NOT THE EXPERT. AND BEFORE YOU REPLY, I'M JUST BEING CAUTIOUS BECAUSE YOU HAVE A FULL LOAD OF WORK TO DO BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF JUNE, JUST DEALING WITH THE APPLICATIONS COMING IN FOR BOE OF APPEALS AND INVESTIGATING THOSE.
SO. RIGHT. ONE ONE THING THAT I CAN MENTION IS THAT JUST LIKE WITH THE OFFICE REVIEW PERIOD, WHEN WE WOULD GET AN APPEAL COME IN, I WOULD NOT JUST LOOK AT THAT ONE PARTICULAR APPEAL ON THAT PARCEL IF I SAW SOMETHING THAT LOOKED KIND OF NOT QUITE CORRECT, I WOULD LOOK AT THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES AROUND IT.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO HEAR IF ONE PERSON APPEALS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY ELSE AROUND THEM IS GIVEN THE FAIR ABILITY TO HAVE THEIR PROPERTY CHANGED, WHETHER THEY REALIZE IT OR NOT.
SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH, WE CAN CONTINUE TO TO DO THAT.
THAT IS TRUE SO WE WILL DO THE BEST WE CAN WITH THE LIMITED STAFF.
ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I GOT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. SO AT THIS TIME, I'D ASK FOR AN ADJOURNMENT PLEASE.
MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I SECOND, IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. PUGH AND SECOND, BY MRS. WAYMACK THAT THE BOARD WOULD ADJOURN.
AT THIS TIME IT IS NOW 8:17 P.M.. YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION.
ANY QUESTIONS? MISS KNOTT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. WEBB? YES. MR. PUGH? YES. MR. COX? YES. MRS. WAYMACK? YES. MR. BROWN? YES. MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.