Travis County Commissioners Court
July 20, 2004
Item 4
All right. Number 4. Consider and take appropriate action on request to set parameters for effective tax rate calculations for tax year 2004.
>> good morning, next Monday we should receive all the certified values from the appraisal district to start the effective tax rate calculations. Each year we make several assumptions going into this and we just wanted to come and have y'all verify that preliminary are what the court agrees to. One is the that we use. This is per the state property tax code. It's not the 98% or whatever the number is that the auditor uses for rates. This is the rate used to raise the debt service rate if we're going to have 100% collections, but we have 100% anticipated rate for both the road district and for Travis County and that is an assumption that we suggest that y'all go with that rate. The optional homestead exemption is 65,000 for disabled and over 65, for 20% which is the maximum allowed by the Texas constitution for all homesteads and we have no exemptions in the road district. Historical exemptions are 100% on the structure, 50% on the land for homesteads and qualified non-profit corporations and on others it is 50% for the improvement and 25% for the land on all others to qualify them. And the fourth item is a debt buy-down and we're making the assumption that on both Travis County and the road district there will be no debt buy-down that we'll have to be advertising in the article for the effective tax rates. Any questions?
>> not so much a question as a comment. I know that the city of Austin has spent a great deal of time and attention looking at what to do about the historical exemption. I will be the first person to say they have reached no firm conclusions because they have this task force headed by betty baker to take a look at it. They came up with some recommendations which were blown off by the city staff and they came up with their own recommendations. So they have not landed anywhere, but I think over this next year, we need to see what does emerge. I think anything that emerges at this point is without consensus and is way too late in the process, considering that we have to make these kinds of decisions, but that may be something that we need to seriously look at because it would make no sense that the city and the county would have differing policies on historical exemptions. It seems like there ought to be some consistency, but I want to acknowledge that it is out there, it is by no means ready.
>> mr. Smith? Comments?
>> no.
>> we've had these in place how long?
>> I guess for 18 years that i've been here this has been the way it's been.
>> that's why I move approval.
>> second.
>> anymore discussion?
>> only one comment, judge, before we vote on this, i've got calls that have come in on the exemptions for senior citizens, and I think some of them are a little confused on some of the exemptions that other entities are not bringing such as Travis County, but after walking through, there are tax bills with some of them that call. They do understand that the county gets about the best break you can get as far as some of these exemptions are concerned. I'm talking about the 65,000 exemption on those 65 years of age and older. I think it's something that people need to realize when they look at the tax bill they need to look at the whole picture instead of -- which they are doing, but they really need to look at Travis County to see how Travis County is doing, and how we separate ourselves as far as the exemption. I.
>> the motion I have is on historical exemption, we plan to take a look at those, I think we ought to starterly in the fiscal year so we can land mid year and let those who may be affected way in advance of the action being taken that we plan to take some action. Anymore discussion? Yes, sir?
>> and I want to follow-up with that. I mean I do think I need to take some time to look at this just from the philosophical bent, you know, from me, if it is a property that is generating income, if it's a commercial property in other words, then I think that it's only right for us to take a look at these things. I mean people that live in a historical home, you know, that's one thing. People that own a building that is supposedly historical and are getting benefits from it, but are deriving revenue, you know, out of that, I mean -- and surethose could be looked at. I would like for us to look at it, but that is another time or another day but I agree with the judge.
>> that is where the greatest amount of debate not so much the homestead that the city brought on the commercial properties, but part of the challenge is a great deal of those historical properties are on 6th street and downd. You can take away those exemptions you can look forward to tattoo parlors and bars. People are going to go out of business downtown because they cannot afford, because that property downtown is amazingly expensive. So it could have huge economic impacts if we're not very careful about what could happen...
>> I think we need to look at it. There where a lot of properties all over town that are expensive. People could say I'm going out of business if you don't give me a break, my building is not historical but I'm hysterical about it. I mean that's what we need to do. We need to spend some time looking at it.
>> I can hardly wait to read that first report. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Friday, October 28, 2005 12:39 PM