Travis County Commissioners Court

June 5, 2012 - Travis County Road District 3
Agenda

View captioned video.

>> Good afternoon.
Let's call to order the Northwest Travis County Road District 3, the Golden Triangle.
One item.
Consider and take appropriate action on property tax considerations for the northwest Travis County road district no.
3.

>> Good afternoon.
Judge Biscoe.

>> Good afternoon.

>> The tax office and here with me is a new member of our team, stephanie brown, and she'll be helping with the effective tax rate calculations this yearment.
For the northwest, for property tax considerations, we're recommending item a, 100% anticipated collection rate noting that this anticipated collection rate is different than the collection rate you'll hear the auditor's office mention in that this anticipated collection rate is used specifically in the effective tax rate calculations.
And since our current collection rate is high, it's about 98, 99% right now, we want to certify anything less than 100% because doing that would have an adverse effect on next year's tax rate.

>> Okay.

>> B, the court has the option to reduce the debt service using year-end or reserve balances in order to buy down the debt rate and we recommend no buy-down of the debt rate.
C, we recommend we stay at current optional homestead exemption, which is the maximum amount allowed by law and that's the greater, $5,000 or 20%.
We usually also recommend two more items. But after talking to leroy from pbo it looks like the board might take action on this at a later time so we'd like to note the current policy but recommend no action on d, the over 65 and disabled optional homestead exemption at $65,000, and e, the historic exemption, 100% on structure and 50% on the land for residences and nonprofit agencies and half that for all other historic properties.
So we're recommending the court adopt a, b and c and take no action right now on d and e.

>> Ms. Brown, what objections do you have?

>> [laughter] any?

>> She's good.

>> [laughter]

>> Are you as nervous as I am about this proceeding?

>> [laughter] mrs.
Eckhardt?

>> Do you have any indication from pbo when they would schedule those two exemptions to come before the court?

>> The reason that I had indicated to tim that we would not at least schedule it at this time for action or recommend was the potential that the discussion to open up the possibility of investigating the home -- the over 65 and the historic preservation.
I don't think that it precludes, if, in fact, the majority of the court wanted to leave them in their current amounts, that it would preclude the court from taking action on this, but I didn't want to presume that action would be taken now.

>> What's the deadline for taking action?
September 30?

>> We could take -- well, the --

>> July.

>> We attempt to get these into the certified tax roll, these exemptions, and the tax roll is scheduled currently to be certified sometime the last -- before we file the preliminary budget on July the 23rd.

>> So decisions on those two exemptions, if they were to change, would have to be made before that time?

>> That's correct, in order to calculate the effect of the effective tax rate and the impact.

>> And the last time the over 65 and disabled exemption was raised was?

>> Many years ago.
I don't have the exact date, but I think it was like 15 years ago.

>> And last year the city of Austin materially changed their policy with regard to homestead exemption and that's not reflected in our current policies -- I mean, not homestead, historic exemption, correct?

>> The policy the city of Austin has always had a $2,500 cap on their historic in addition to some other variances.
Their current -- my understanding is their current policy, their new policy, continues to have a $2,500 cap on the historic preservation.

>> But ours does not?

>> Ours does not.
Ours is opened, unlimited.

>> Ms. He can ert?
Additional comments?

>> Yes, in talking with the appraisal district they would always appreciate if we could give them at least a couple weeks lead, so the beginning of July would be better if you were going to adopt some changes.

>> I guess we can leave open the possibility, but if we were to approve these and later wanted to change them, we would just put an item on and consider, right?

>> Once they approve them, can they revise them prior to the certification of the tax roll?

>> Yes.

>> Remember all the authority we have, ms. Wilson.

>> [laughter] why don't we just

>> [inaudible] five and if we want to bring 4 and 5 back we'll do it.
Meaning d and e.

>> But I would prefer not to vote on the over 65 and disabled and the historic exemption until we have numbers reflective if we were to follow the city of Austin's policy, how much would that free up that we could put toward an over 65 and disabled increase.

>> Doesn't matter with me.
Six of one, half dozen of the other.
Move approval of a, b and c and move that we hold off on d and e.

>> Second.

>> Discussion on the motion?
All in favor?
That passes by unanimous vote.
Thank you all very much.

>> Will we adjourn?

>> Thank you for your eloquent presentation.
All in favor.
That carries unanimously.

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.