The Town sent out approximately 8600 checks to property owners in the Town of James Island last week. Well, in reality, we paid a company to print the checks and mail them out to a data base we provided.
About a year ago, I looked at the 2009 Audit for the Town, I was surprised to find we had $2.4 in tax credits payable in on June 30, 2009. When the Town received the the 2010 Audit last October, it showed $2.56 million in tax credits payable on June 30, 2010.
Of course, the previous administration sent out over $800,000 in tax credit checks in July of 2010, which reduced that item. But each month, the Town receives a Property Tax credit check, which we put in the bank and add to our tax credit payable liability.
Why did the Town have such a large amount in Tax credits payable? Because the tax credit checks were too small. However, the budget for the property tax payable fund showed expected receipts for the year, and check payments of $900,000, which simply copied the proposal made by the Clark administration.
My hope, all along, has been to work with the County Auditor's Office to have the tax credit placed on the property tax bills of James Island taxpayers, and then pay the money the Town receives directly to the James Island P.S.D. and no longer send annual tax rebate checks.
Sending the checks is expensive, it cost about $8,000 in printing and postage costs. Further, because of problems in the database we use, the errors create an administrative nightmare. Reviewing problems and issuing new checks because of problems with the checks issued in July has been a major drain on the time of our Finance Clerk.
However, I think that shifting to this system before the Supreme Court rules on the Town would be a mistake. So, I thought that we might have to send out one more set of checks.
Last fall, I requested that the County Auditor's office provide a database of those receiving 2010 property tax bills in the Town of James Island. (I also asked them to find out how much revenue a mil of property tax would generate as I reported before.) It was my understanding that they had agreed to provide that information.
I was in no hurry. However, at some point, I planned to request that Town Council approve a budget modification to pay out all of those accumulated tax credits payable. Either we would send out one more set of checks, or, if negotiations with the Auditor's Office and the JIPSD went well, then everyone's property tax bills would be reduced and we would pay the money over to the JIPSD.
Then I went to Columbia and listened to the tone of Chief Justice Jean Toal's questions about the formation of the Town.
If the Supreme Court rules against the Town, then all funds will be seized and divided up. That includes all of the money in property tax credits payable.
I became very concerned.
I contacted the County Auditors office again for an updated database I proposed a change in the budget to authorize the payment of the tax credits payable this fiscal year. Budget changes require two readings, and so these were scheduled for the March 1st and March 15th meetings.
Because we hadn't received updated information from the County Auditor's Office, we began working on our existing data base, correcting for all the errors we had discovered since last July. As March 15th approached, I contacted the Auditor's Office again, and they were still not ready.
On March 16th, I made the decision to send out the checks using our existing data base. In my judgment, it was the right thing to do, because of the risk of an unfavorable decision by the Supreme Court that could happen at any time.
Of course, when it turns out that the Supreme Court rules in favor of the Town, I will feel a bit foolish. And as I, and the staff, work to fix the errors, I will wish we would have waited.
Again, I very much hope that this is the last time the Town will be sending out checks!
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
The 2011-2012 Budget
I have proposed a draft budget for the 2011-12 fiscal year. That fiscal year will start on July 1, 2011 and end on June 30, 2012.
For the first time, the Town's budget is made up of department budgets, developed by the member of the staff responsible for each area. The planning director created the first draft of the budget for the planning department, the public works coordinator developed the first draft of the public works budget, and so on. This is different from the past, where the budget was put together by the planning consultant, Roy DeHaven.
There have been two budget workshops where members of Town Council had an opportunity to discuss each department budget with the appropriate member of the staff. A draft for a complete budget passed Ways and Means last Tuesday, but this simply moved it forward to the Public Hearing on April 4th. After the hearing, there will be another budget workshop to provide an opportunity to make adjustments based on public comments, after which a final budget will be developed for a first reading on April 19th. The second and final reading is scheduled for May 3, well before the deadline of June 30.
For the current draft budget, total expenditures are $2,050,000, which is approximately the same amount as was budgeted in 2010-11. That was the budget that was very late, failing to pass in June of 2010, and then, in a modified form, being passed first in October and then modified in November.
As with the current fiscal year, I have proposed substantial expenditures on deferred maintenance on drainage over the coming year. Deferred maintenance means spending money on catching up on drainage projects that should have been done in past years. In other words, it represents regular annual maintenance that was neglected in the past. Drainage ditches were allowed to fill up and become overgrown.
How much deferred maintenance does the Town's drainage system have at this time? Unfortunately, we still do not have a complete account. Because the Town participates in the Charleston County Storm Water Utility, we have access to the County's database, but the system is still under development. It was supposed to have been ready last December, but is now expected later this spring. Still, when I asked the Director of Charleston County Public Works for a rough estimate, he said approximately $1,000,000.
We are looking at approximately $460,000 in total expenditures on drainage maintenance for the coming year. We budgeted $600,000 for 2010-2011, and so these add up to approximately the estimated amount. Of course, after we catch up with the deferred maintenance, we will still need to keep up with regular, annual maintenance to avoid falling behind again.
How can the Town afford to pay for this backlog of drainage projects? Fortunately, according to our February financial report, the Town has a net funds balance of nearly $1.4 million dollars. Over the past 5 years, the Town collected money from the taxpayers and didn't spend it on anything. The Town accumulated savings, which we call the net fund balance.
Isn't it good to accumulate savings? Perhaps, if it is your own money. I am sure that many taxpayers would have preferred to keep their money rather than having the Town take it and just leave it in the Town's bank account. Worse, putting money in the bank while letting the roof fall in is hardly wise. Is is essential to keep up with necessary maintenance. In my view, the Town did need the money and should have spent it on needed drainage projects. (This is easier said than done, however, and even today, the Town is making only slow progress in catching up on deferred maintenance. Projects must be identified, planned, bid out, and then completed.)
As the Town spends down these savings, there are three possible scenarios for 2012-13. One possible scenario is that the Town will fully catch up with deferred drainage maintenance and still have savings in the net fund balance. In my view, a capital expenditure, like a down payment on a Town Hall, would be an appropriate use of those funds. (Hiring additional employees or creating a new, continuing spending program would not be a responsible use of the funds.)
A second, less favorable scenario, is that we will still be behind on drainage maintenance even after our net funds balance is reduced to the level we need to manage our cash position over the year--something between $500,000 and $250,000.
At that point, we must reduce our expenditures to match our current revenues. Fortunately, as the U.S. and South Carolina economies continue to recover, our current revenues should increase to $1.7 or $1.8 million per year. If we have fully caught up with deferred drainage maintenance, a substantial reduction in drainage expenditures will be possible. Otherwise, catching up with deferred maintenance will need to slow.
A third possibility is that we will still have deferred maintenance because we have yet to spend the budgeted funds. If that happens, the net fund balance will carry forward to the next year, along with the need to use it to fund additional drainage projects. (This scenario is looking more and more likely for the 2010-11 fiscal year.)
If it turns out that current revenues are not sufficient to keep up with regular maintenance and other needed expenses, (or catch up with any remaining maintenance,) current expenditures must be reduced or more current revenue obtained.
It is important to understand, however, that the Town in no danger of going broke, even if we maintain expenditures at the $2 million dollar level. The Town will be receiving about $1.2 million each year in Local Option Sales Tax Property Tax Credit funds.
For the 2011-12 fiscal year, I have proposed that the Town pay out this $1.2 million to the taxpayers. (I hope that this credit will appear on next year's tax bills and so reduce the amount paid by the taxpayers, with the Town directly paying the funds over to the JIPSD. We would stop mailing checks to taxpayers.)
The Town has been receiving approximately this amount for the last several years, but has paid out about 3/4 to the taxpayers. As of last month, more than $2.5 million of tax credits payable had been accumulated. So, by reducing the size of the tax credits to approximately what was paid in 2008 or 2009, the Town can easily afford to maintain expenditures at $2 million per year.
I consider this approach to be a last resort, and believe that the funds the Town receives for the property tax credit should be given to the taxpayers as a property tax credit. Because we don't have a Town millage, and the people of the Town pay the JIPSD millage instead, we are under no legal obligation to make these payments. But I think providing this credit is the right thing to do. Still, it is very important for everyone to understand that the Town could afford to operate at a substantially higher level of expenditure if necessary.
Welcome Hal Mason, Our New Town Administrator
Last Tuesday, the majority of Town Council voted in favor of appointing Hal Mason to serve as the Town Administrator.
Hal Mason had a long career in local government in North Carolina before coming to Hanahan, where he served as Town Administrator for five years.
When I ran for Mayor, I explained that I planned to hire an experienced and professional Town Administrator. I explained that I would continue to teach at The Citadel, and would be a part-time Mayor.
When the Clark administration set the salaries for Mayor and Council in late 2007, there was a report suggesting that if the Town had an Administrator and the Mayor served part time, then the proper pay for the Mayor would be $15,000 per year. If, on the other hand, the Town did without an administrator, then with the Mayor directing the day-to-day operations of the Town, the proper pay would be $35,000. Mayor Clark chose to be a full time Mayor, accept $35,000 per year, and do without a Town administrator.
However, the Town hired a Planning consultant--Roy DeHaven. He was paid $60,000 per year and was on duty at Town Hall during the morning. The duties of this "planning consultant" included everything--Planning, Building, Budgeting, Code Enforcement and Public Works.
Soon after I became Mayor, Roy DeHaven was let go. And so, the Town reduced expenditures by $60,000 per year. Mayor and Council are free to accept only part of the permitted salary, and so, I reduced my salary to $15,000 per year. That saved $20,000 in salary expense.
It was that $80,000 of annual expense that I planned to allocate to paying for an official Town Administrator. Rather than having a "Planning Consultant" who played the role of a Town Administrator who was only here in the morning but delegated almost nothing to our staff, we would have a full time Town Administrator.
The current budget has $30,000 devoted to Town Administrator salary. That is much less than $80,000. First, at best, I hoped to have a Town Administrator hired for January, so $30,000 would cover $60,000 per year until the end of June. I realized that it might be necessary to pay more than that to hire the right person. (While some part time administrators earn less, most earn much more.) Still, I didn't want to have the maximum I was willing to offer right in the budget for every candidate for the job to see. If necessary, I realized that I might have to return to Council to ask for a budget adjustment.
I have agreed to pay Hal Mason a salary of $65,000 per year. Because he is coming at the beginning of April, there are sufficient funds to pay his salary for the rest of the year without any budget amendment.
What about the $80,000? Are we saving $15,000? Unfortunately, no. Additional payroll costs, including taxes and benefits, are substantial for all of our employees, including our new Town Administrator. (There were no additional payroll costs for the "planning consultant" because Roy DeHaven wasn't an employee of the Town. He was a consultant.) The total expense is more than $80,000 per year, and the remainder is just covered by the reduction in payroll expense for the Mayor. Because my salary is smaller, the payroll taxes and retirement contributions the Town must make for me are smaller than they were for Mayor Clark.
Do we need a Town Administrator? We have been able to operate without one. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Councilman Leonard Blank, who has spent many hours at Town Hall, helping our former planner, James Hacket, step into his new role as Planning Director. And most of all, to Councilman Carter McMillan, (currently Mayor Pro-tem,) who is almost always at Town Hall, and has done a tremendous amount of work in a variety of areas, but especially with Public Works.
Still, it is my judgement that substantial improvements in Town operations are possible. And I believe that Hal Mason is the man to make it happen.
Hal Mason had a long career in local government in North Carolina before coming to Hanahan, where he served as Town Administrator for five years.
When I ran for Mayor, I explained that I planned to hire an experienced and professional Town Administrator. I explained that I would continue to teach at The Citadel, and would be a part-time Mayor.
When the Clark administration set the salaries for Mayor and Council in late 2007, there was a report suggesting that if the Town had an Administrator and the Mayor served part time, then the proper pay for the Mayor would be $15,000 per year. If, on the other hand, the Town did without an administrator, then with the Mayor directing the day-to-day operations of the Town, the proper pay would be $35,000. Mayor Clark chose to be a full time Mayor, accept $35,000 per year, and do without a Town administrator.
However, the Town hired a Planning consultant--Roy DeHaven. He was paid $60,000 per year and was on duty at Town Hall during the morning. The duties of this "planning consultant" included everything--Planning, Building, Budgeting, Code Enforcement and Public Works.
Soon after I became Mayor, Roy DeHaven was let go. And so, the Town reduced expenditures by $60,000 per year. Mayor and Council are free to accept only part of the permitted salary, and so, I reduced my salary to $15,000 per year. That saved $20,000 in salary expense.
It was that $80,000 of annual expense that I planned to allocate to paying for an official Town Administrator. Rather than having a "Planning Consultant" who played the role of a Town Administrator who was only here in the morning but delegated almost nothing to our staff, we would have a full time Town Administrator.
The current budget has $30,000 devoted to Town Administrator salary. That is much less than $80,000. First, at best, I hoped to have a Town Administrator hired for January, so $30,000 would cover $60,000 per year until the end of June. I realized that it might be necessary to pay more than that to hire the right person. (While some part time administrators earn less, most earn much more.) Still, I didn't want to have the maximum I was willing to offer right in the budget for every candidate for the job to see. If necessary, I realized that I might have to return to Council to ask for a budget adjustment.
I have agreed to pay Hal Mason a salary of $65,000 per year. Because he is coming at the beginning of April, there are sufficient funds to pay his salary for the rest of the year without any budget amendment.
What about the $80,000? Are we saving $15,000? Unfortunately, no. Additional payroll costs, including taxes and benefits, are substantial for all of our employees, including our new Town Administrator. (There were no additional payroll costs for the "planning consultant" because Roy DeHaven wasn't an employee of the Town. He was a consultant.) The total expense is more than $80,000 per year, and the remainder is just covered by the reduction in payroll expense for the Mayor. Because my salary is smaller, the payroll taxes and retirement contributions the Town must make for me are smaller than they were for Mayor Clark.
Do we need a Town Administrator? We have been able to operate without one. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Councilman Leonard Blank, who has spent many hours at Town Hall, helping our former planner, James Hacket, step into his new role as Planning Director. And most of all, to Councilman Carter McMillan, (currently Mayor Pro-tem,) who is almost always at Town Hall, and has done a tremendous amount of work in a variety of areas, but especially with Public Works.
Still, it is my judgement that substantial improvements in Town operations are possible. And I believe that Hal Mason is the man to make it happen.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Property Taxes and James Island
I asked Peggy Moseley, Charleston County's Auditor, to find out how much a mil of property tax would generate for the Town of James Island. The assistant auditor answered the question, and it is approximately $84,000.
I have no plan to propose any municipal property tax for the Town of James Island, but I thought we should know. I also requested a list of the mailing addresses of all of the property taxpayers in the Town of James Island along with the amount they paid the James Island Public Service District. That list has not materialized yet, but I am still hopeful that we will receive it. The purpose of such a list is to determine who will receive how much property tax rebate using the local option sales tax funds. I would very much like to send those rebates out for this year as soon as possible, as well as the amount of the rebate that was held back over the last three years.
Now, I would like to share some hard realities about property taxes in the Town of James Island. It will help if you will find your tax bill. It can be for your house or your car. The way property tax works is that your property is appraised--its value is estimated. Then the property is assessed. The assessment rates are not the same for all classes of property. For example, owner-occupied residences are assessed at 4% of appraised value. If you house is appraised at $100,000, then the assessment is $4,000. A mil is 1/10 of a percent. And so, a mil of property tax on a $100,000 home is $4 per year.
While the Town of James Island has no millage, those of us living in the Town pay property tax to the James Island Public Service District. The services provided by the James Island Public Service district are services provided by many towns and cities--fire protection, garbage and trash pick up, and wastewater. We all receive sewer bills from the JISPD, but our JIPSD property taxes are what pays for the James Island Fire Department and our twice weekly garbage pickup.
The millage for the James Island P.S.D. is 53.4 for current operations and 4.1 for bonds. That adds up to 57.5. That is mils, and so it is the same thing as 5.75 percent of assessed value. For a house worth $100,000 that is $230.
How much does the JIPSD collect from everyone in the Town? Our estimate is $84,000 per mil, so that would be $4.8 million. Now, the James Island PSD collects more property tax than that because there are a few people on James Island that are not in the Town or the City of Charleston. Also, they are able to collect property tax on some people who already annexed into the City of Charleston.
Look again at your tax bill. Charleston County charges 40.2 mils for County Government Operations and 6.6 mils for bonds, which adds up to 46.8 mils. For a $100,000 house, you are assessed $4000, and 46.8 mils is 4.68 percent. That is $187.20 per year.
Everyone in Charleston County pays the exact same millage to the County, 46.8 mils. That includes people who live in the City of Charleston, Mount Pleasant, North Charleston, Folly Beach, Kiawah Island, Ravenal, Megget, Hollywood, and Awendaw. And it includes people who live in no town or city, for example most of those living on Johns Island. Here is a copy of a City of Chareston tax bill. Here is one from Mount Pleasant. Look at yours. The millage for County Operating and County bonds are the same.
This is controversial because some people on James Island think that when we incorporated and formed a Town, these County property taxes should have been reduced. Well, I am sure that people living in all the various municipalities wish these taxes were reduced for people living in municipalities, but they are not.
Charleston County collects approximately $3.9 million from the property taxpayers in the Town of James Island. Charleston County collects about $100 million in property taxes from everyone in the County. Property taxpayers in the Town provide a little less than 4 percent of the total property tax revenues for Charleston County. Our population of 20,000 is a little less than 6 percent of the total population of 348,000. (What is up with this discrepancy? Think about the appraised value of the properties below Broad, and on the front beach of Kiawah, Seabrook, Folly, Sullivans, and Isle of Palms.)
During the second incorporation of the Town, Charleston County Council created a rule that any municipality with a population over 5,000 must pay for any basic services provided by the County. This rule was imposed at the beginning of the third incorporation. The other three municipalities with populations over 5,000 are the City of Charleston, the City of North Charleston, and the Town of Mount Pleasant. We are supposed to be treated the same as they are.
What are these basic services? For the most part, it is public works--road and drainage maintenance. For paved roads, the maintenance is filling potholes in town roads. State roads and resurfacing of paved roads are covered by either SCDOT or county government, mostly out of state or federal funds. Planning and Zoning, Building Inspections, and Code Enforcement are also included as basic services, but all of these generate fee or fine income that at least partly offsets the costs. Most of the municipalities have public works departments, with the big three, the City of Charleston, North Charleston, and Mount Pleasant covering most of their expenses out of town funds. Some municipalities, like Seabrook and Kiawah, receive next to nothing from County Public Works, with everything covered by property owner assessments.
Law enforcement, on the other hand, is not included as one of these "basic services" for which municipalities must pay. Charleston County Sheriff's Office provides law enforcement to any municipality in the county that wants it. However, keep in mind that the other three municipalities with populations over 5,000, the City of Charleston, the City of North Charleston, and the Town of Mount Pleasant have their own municipal police departments. Further, most of the smaller municipalities have police departments as well, such as Folly Beach.
If you haven't heard about this yet, I am telling you now. Other local municipal governments complain that their citizens pay the exact same property tax millage to the County as those of us in the Town of James Island, but we are getting our policing from the Sheriff's Office for "free" instead of paying for our own police department like they do. The Sheriff's Office budget is about $60 million, 20 percent of the County's total budget of $346 million.. However, about $24 million is narrowly "law enforcement" with personnel of 305.
The national average for police forces is between one and two officers per thousand. Our population is 20,000, so that is between 20 and 40 officers. The Sheriff's Office will provide off duty officers for $27.50 per hour. That is $55,000 per officer per year. For 30 officers, that would be $1.65 million per year. (Keep in mind that 30 officers isn't 30 on patrol at a time. It takes about 4 patrol officers to have one on patrol 24/7. And don't forget desk duty, detectives, and a police chief!)
The City of Charleston imposes a municipal tax rate of 77.1 plus 2 for drainage improvements. That is 79.1. Suppose the Town of James Island imposed a millage equal to the difference between what the James Island PSD charges and the City of Charleston. That would be 21.6 mils. For a $100,000 value house that would be $86 per year. However, the local option sales tax municipal property tax credit would show up on your bill, so the actual increase in the amount paid would be about $39 per year.
The Town would collect about $800,000 and the rebate checks from the Town would no longer arrive each year. Of course, the town wouldn't spend the $1 million per year to send those checks This would come close to doubling the Town's revenues from $1.6 million to $3.4 million. The current operating budget for the Town is $2 million. Three years from now, we will have to cut spending by $400,000 per year unless our other sources of revenue that depend on economic activity, like business licenses, local option sales tax, and even state aid to subdivisions expand.
I hope you all know that I am very fiscally conservative. While our current budget is very small for a town of 20,000, the JIPSD is spending another $12 million to provide what are really municipal services, for the most part to people in the Town. While our property tax rates (paid to the JIPSD) are lower than the City of Charleston or North Charleston, they are higher than the Town of Mount Pleasant, and much higher than the Folly Beach, Sullivan's Island, or the Isle of Palms. (Most of us pay smaller bills with our higher rates than most people in those towns because their houses are worth more on average.)
I believe we need to hold the line on government spending in the Town. I hope sharing these figures helps you understand why.
I have no plan to propose any municipal property tax for the Town of James Island, but I thought we should know. I also requested a list of the mailing addresses of all of the property taxpayers in the Town of James Island along with the amount they paid the James Island Public Service District. That list has not materialized yet, but I am still hopeful that we will receive it. The purpose of such a list is to determine who will receive how much property tax rebate using the local option sales tax funds. I would very much like to send those rebates out for this year as soon as possible, as well as the amount of the rebate that was held back over the last three years.
Now, I would like to share some hard realities about property taxes in the Town of James Island. It will help if you will find your tax bill. It can be for your house or your car. The way property tax works is that your property is appraised--its value is estimated. Then the property is assessed. The assessment rates are not the same for all classes of property. For example, owner-occupied residences are assessed at 4% of appraised value. If you house is appraised at $100,000, then the assessment is $4,000. A mil is 1/10 of a percent. And so, a mil of property tax on a $100,000 home is $4 per year.
While the Town of James Island has no millage, those of us living in the Town pay property tax to the James Island Public Service District. The services provided by the James Island Public Service district are services provided by many towns and cities--fire protection, garbage and trash pick up, and wastewater. We all receive sewer bills from the JISPD, but our JIPSD property taxes are what pays for the James Island Fire Department and our twice weekly garbage pickup.
The millage for the James Island P.S.D. is 53.4 for current operations and 4.1 for bonds. That adds up to 57.5. That is mils, and so it is the same thing as 5.75 percent of assessed value. For a house worth $100,000 that is $230.
How much does the JIPSD collect from everyone in the Town? Our estimate is $84,000 per mil, so that would be $4.8 million. Now, the James Island PSD collects more property tax than that because there are a few people on James Island that are not in the Town or the City of Charleston. Also, they are able to collect property tax on some people who already annexed into the City of Charleston.
Look again at your tax bill. Charleston County charges 40.2 mils for County Government Operations and 6.6 mils for bonds, which adds up to 46.8 mils. For a $100,000 house, you are assessed $4000, and 46.8 mils is 4.68 percent. That is $187.20 per year.
Everyone in Charleston County pays the exact same millage to the County, 46.8 mils. That includes people who live in the City of Charleston, Mount Pleasant, North Charleston, Folly Beach, Kiawah Island, Ravenal, Megget, Hollywood, and Awendaw. And it includes people who live in no town or city, for example most of those living on Johns Island. Here is a copy of a City of Chareston tax bill. Here is one from Mount Pleasant. Look at yours. The millage for County Operating and County bonds are the same.
This is controversial because some people on James Island think that when we incorporated and formed a Town, these County property taxes should have been reduced. Well, I am sure that people living in all the various municipalities wish these taxes were reduced for people living in municipalities, but they are not.
Charleston County collects approximately $3.9 million from the property taxpayers in the Town of James Island. Charleston County collects about $100 million in property taxes from everyone in the County. Property taxpayers in the Town provide a little less than 4 percent of the total property tax revenues for Charleston County. Our population of 20,000 is a little less than 6 percent of the total population of 348,000. (What is up with this discrepancy? Think about the appraised value of the properties below Broad, and on the front beach of Kiawah, Seabrook, Folly, Sullivans, and Isle of Palms.)
During the second incorporation of the Town, Charleston County Council created a rule that any municipality with a population over 5,000 must pay for any basic services provided by the County. This rule was imposed at the beginning of the third incorporation. The other three municipalities with populations over 5,000 are the City of Charleston, the City of North Charleston, and the Town of Mount Pleasant. We are supposed to be treated the same as they are.
What are these basic services? For the most part, it is public works--road and drainage maintenance. For paved roads, the maintenance is filling potholes in town roads. State roads and resurfacing of paved roads are covered by either SCDOT or county government, mostly out of state or federal funds. Planning and Zoning, Building Inspections, and Code Enforcement are also included as basic services, but all of these generate fee or fine income that at least partly offsets the costs. Most of the municipalities have public works departments, with the big three, the City of Charleston, North Charleston, and Mount Pleasant covering most of their expenses out of town funds. Some municipalities, like Seabrook and Kiawah, receive next to nothing from County Public Works, with everything covered by property owner assessments.
Law enforcement, on the other hand, is not included as one of these "basic services" for which municipalities must pay. Charleston County Sheriff's Office provides law enforcement to any municipality in the county that wants it. However, keep in mind that the other three municipalities with populations over 5,000, the City of Charleston, the City of North Charleston, and the Town of Mount Pleasant have their own municipal police departments. Further, most of the smaller municipalities have police departments as well, such as Folly Beach.
If you haven't heard about this yet, I am telling you now. Other local municipal governments complain that their citizens pay the exact same property tax millage to the County as those of us in the Town of James Island, but we are getting our policing from the Sheriff's Office for "free" instead of paying for our own police department like they do. The Sheriff's Office budget is about $60 million, 20 percent of the County's total budget of $346 million.. However, about $24 million is narrowly "law enforcement" with personnel of 305.
The national average for police forces is between one and two officers per thousand. Our population is 20,000, so that is between 20 and 40 officers. The Sheriff's Office will provide off duty officers for $27.50 per hour. That is $55,000 per officer per year. For 30 officers, that would be $1.65 million per year. (Keep in mind that 30 officers isn't 30 on patrol at a time. It takes about 4 patrol officers to have one on patrol 24/7. And don't forget desk duty, detectives, and a police chief!)
The City of Charleston imposes a municipal tax rate of 77.1 plus 2 for drainage improvements. That is 79.1. Suppose the Town of James Island imposed a millage equal to the difference between what the James Island PSD charges and the City of Charleston. That would be 21.6 mils. For a $100,000 value house that would be $86 per year. However, the local option sales tax municipal property tax credit would show up on your bill, so the actual increase in the amount paid would be about $39 per year.
The Town would collect about $800,000 and the rebate checks from the Town would no longer arrive each year. Of course, the town wouldn't spend the $1 million per year to send those checks This would come close to doubling the Town's revenues from $1.6 million to $3.4 million. The current operating budget for the Town is $2 million. Three years from now, we will have to cut spending by $400,000 per year unless our other sources of revenue that depend on economic activity, like business licenses, local option sales tax, and even state aid to subdivisions expand.
I hope you all know that I am very fiscally conservative. While our current budget is very small for a town of 20,000, the JIPSD is spending another $12 million to provide what are really municipal services, for the most part to people in the Town. While our property tax rates (paid to the JIPSD) are lower than the City of Charleston or North Charleston, they are higher than the Town of Mount Pleasant, and much higher than the Folly Beach, Sullivan's Island, or the Isle of Palms. (Most of us pay smaller bills with our higher rates than most people in those towns because their houses are worth more on average.)
I believe we need to hold the line on government spending in the Town. I hope sharing these figures helps you understand why.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
How Did it Go?
How did it go?
It is difficult to say.
Can we take the questions of the Justices to suggest their current thinking?
If so, then the chance that they will overturn the incorporation legislation is small.
On the other hand, they may determine that the Town was improperly formed under existing law. The City has a long list of complaints about the paper work filed to form the Town, some of which sounds trivial to me, but others are more substantive.
Some parcels (perhaps vacant lots but sometimes the homes of individual citizens) were removed from the Town by the Circuit Court because they had already been annexed into the City or were not contiguous. Out of the approximately 9000 in the Town less than 200 were removed by the Circuit Court.
Generally, the Supreme Court is supposed to be reviewing issues of law, and to some degree, whether or not the Town was properly formed are matters of fact. Were the legal principles the Circuit Court used in finding fact appropriate.
I think so. But we will soon find out if the Supreme Court agrees.
What will the Supreme Court do? They might close the Town down.
If the Supreme Court decides against the Town, we will have to incorporate a fourth time using the current law.
It is difficult to say.
Can we take the questions of the Justices to suggest their current thinking?
If so, then the chance that they will overturn the incorporation legislation is small.
On the other hand, they may determine that the Town was improperly formed under existing law. The City has a long list of complaints about the paper work filed to form the Town, some of which sounds trivial to me, but others are more substantive.
Some parcels (perhaps vacant lots but sometimes the homes of individual citizens) were removed from the Town by the Circuit Court because they had already been annexed into the City or were not contiguous. Out of the approximately 9000 in the Town less than 200 were removed by the Circuit Court.
Generally, the Supreme Court is supposed to be reviewing issues of law, and to some degree, whether or not the Town was properly formed are matters of fact. Were the legal principles the Circuit Court used in finding fact appropriate.
I think so. But we will soon find out if the Supreme Court agrees.
What will the Supreme Court do? They might close the Town down.
If the Supreme Court decides against the Town, we will have to incorporate a fourth time using the current law.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
At Charleston City Council
Almost....
Next Wednesday, the Supreme Court of South Carolina will hear the City of Charleston's appeal of the circuit court's decision in favor of the incorporation of James Island.
During the last week. there were seven members of Charleston City Council who were ready to vote to drop the suit. At first, there were six yeses and one maybe. The maybe turned into a yes, but one of the yeses turned into a maybe. In the debate Tuesday night, the yes that had turned into a maybe made clear that he was now a no. No vote was taken.
I want to thank Mayor Riley for allowing me to speak in the citizen's comment period. I told the story of how a James Island pastor, early in my campaign, told me that all of the people of James Island, both Town and City, are being held hostage by this pointless war and that someone needs to make peace. I asked Mayor Riley, and the City of Charleston City Council to make peace now. I promised cooperation between the Town and the City of Charleston.
But I also promised a fourth incorporation. I hope every citizen of the Town of James Island knows that Senator Glenn McConnell, who represents most of us in the South Carolina Senate, has helped the Town with its efforts at incorporation. If the Supreme Court finds defects in the current incorporation law, then he will see that the necessary changes are made.
Sadly, Mayor Riley chose to give a very combative speech. Those of us who have been involved in this "war" for some time are quite aware of his views. He claims that the public policy of the state is that large cities should control the surrounding suburban communities. It is the normal view of big city liberal Democrat mayors. Often, the purpose is to tax more affluent suburban communities to fund social services to the inner city poor. However, there is also an argument that the affluent suburban communities should be taxed to support projects that promote downtown development, like stadiums and auditoriums.
Well, he didn't say much about how we in the Town should taxed to support Eastside. As we all know, we have poor communities on James Island, and there are plenty of poor neighborhoods in the City of North Charleston. No, it was the economic development end of things. Supposedly, forming our own Town and not being in the City of Charleston allows us to free ride by going to hospitals, sending our children to the College of Charleston or the Citadel, going to the Symphony, the Charleston Museum, and I don't know what else.
Well, I have been to St. Francis Roper Hospital and one son attends The Citadel. I have been to most downtown attractions at one time or another. I don't know about you, but the hospital bills were high and tuition at The Citadel isn't cheap. I will grant that I have visited some downtown parks, and they were free. Thank you, Mayor Riley and the taxpayers of the City.
Mayor Riley also complained that citizens of the Town use City facilities here on James Island. He was especially focused on the City Recreation Center. Oddly enough, I haven't used it. However, I know that many citizens of the Town, especially children, are involved in city sponsored team sports. And, of course, their parents pay fees. When Mayor Riley claimed that his annexation of the James Island Charter School showed that citizens of the Town are free riding on the City, he was getting little ridiculous. Any burden to the taxpayers of the City of Charleston caused by his spot annexations on James Island are the responsibility of Mayor Riley.
I must admit that I find Sunrise Park very nice (I apologize to those immediate neighbors who aren't so happy about it.) While I don't go there frequently, I go there more often than to our own Dock Street Park. So, I must thank Mayor Riley and the taxpayers of the City for allowing us to enjoy Sunrise Park. And I welcome them to visit Dock Street Park.
At the level of grand public policy, I favor multiple jurisdictions. This allows a variety of combinations of levels of taxes and provision of public services. It provides the residents of a metropolitan area with choice, just like the free enterprise system provides for a variety of goods and services that cater to a variety of tastes. Those who want extensive and ample provision of government services can live in a community that provides such services to its residents and charges high property taxes. And it isn't just the over-all level of provision, some communities can provide more services of one type, like parks and recreation, while another community can have better garbage pick up.
More importantly, competition provides protection against unjust exploitation--taxing one group of people to provide services that solely benefit some other group of people. For example, taxing people who like to go to rock concerts in North Charleston to subsidize the provision of classical music in downtown Charleston. In my view, the proper role of government is to provide services that benefit everyone. Of course, those who live in one jurisdiction cannot tax citizens in another jurisdiction. However, the existence of competition makes it difficult for a city to tax one segment of its own citizens to provide services they don't want, but others do. People will move, or more realistically, when some of them move, fewer people will move in to replace them if they are treated as nothing but a source of funds. The existence of competing jurisdictions helps protect those living in the City of Charleston from exploitation.
What about wasteful duplication of services? This is a very important concern, and that is why I support contracting out. The practice of each municipality providing all services themselves does lead to waste. The way to combine multiple jurisdictions that compete for residents with efficient provision of public services is for municipalities to purchase services for their citizens from the neighboring municipality or private provider that is most efficient.
As for downtown economic development, it is hard to imagine that the Mayor of a major tourist destination would worry so much about citizens of the Town enjoying these amenities. Consider the Waterfront park. It does add something to the attractiveness of the City of Charleston as a tourist destination. Much of the benefit goes to the downtown merchants, especially restaurants. They pay high property taxes for those locations. And, of course, those businesses receive that money back by selling products to the tourists. And by selling to people from the Town of James Island.
If you see the free market economist in me celebrating competition, you should not be surprised. What I find surprising is that after eight years of Mark Sanford and our newly elected governor, Nikki Haley, that Mayor Riley still thinks that the public policy of this state is for big city mayors to control all of the surrounding suburban communities so that they can fund big urban government. Don't bet on it.
Next Wednesday, the Supreme Court of South Carolina will hear the City of Charleston's appeal of the circuit court's decision in favor of the incorporation of James Island.
During the last week. there were seven members of Charleston City Council who were ready to vote to drop the suit. At first, there were six yeses and one maybe. The maybe turned into a yes, but one of the yeses turned into a maybe. In the debate Tuesday night, the yes that had turned into a maybe made clear that he was now a no. No vote was taken.
I want to thank Mayor Riley for allowing me to speak in the citizen's comment period. I told the story of how a James Island pastor, early in my campaign, told me that all of the people of James Island, both Town and City, are being held hostage by this pointless war and that someone needs to make peace. I asked Mayor Riley, and the City of Charleston City Council to make peace now. I promised cooperation between the Town and the City of Charleston.
But I also promised a fourth incorporation. I hope every citizen of the Town of James Island knows that Senator Glenn McConnell, who represents most of us in the South Carolina Senate, has helped the Town with its efforts at incorporation. If the Supreme Court finds defects in the current incorporation law, then he will see that the necessary changes are made.
Sadly, Mayor Riley chose to give a very combative speech. Those of us who have been involved in this "war" for some time are quite aware of his views. He claims that the public policy of the state is that large cities should control the surrounding suburban communities. It is the normal view of big city liberal Democrat mayors. Often, the purpose is to tax more affluent suburban communities to fund social services to the inner city poor. However, there is also an argument that the affluent suburban communities should be taxed to support projects that promote downtown development, like stadiums and auditoriums.
Well, he didn't say much about how we in the Town should taxed to support Eastside. As we all know, we have poor communities on James Island, and there are plenty of poor neighborhoods in the City of North Charleston. No, it was the economic development end of things. Supposedly, forming our own Town and not being in the City of Charleston allows us to free ride by going to hospitals, sending our children to the College of Charleston or the Citadel, going to the Symphony, the Charleston Museum, and I don't know what else.
Well, I have been to St. Francis Roper Hospital and one son attends The Citadel. I have been to most downtown attractions at one time or another. I don't know about you, but the hospital bills were high and tuition at The Citadel isn't cheap. I will grant that I have visited some downtown parks, and they were free. Thank you, Mayor Riley and the taxpayers of the City.
Mayor Riley also complained that citizens of the Town use City facilities here on James Island. He was especially focused on the City Recreation Center. Oddly enough, I haven't used it. However, I know that many citizens of the Town, especially children, are involved in city sponsored team sports. And, of course, their parents pay fees. When Mayor Riley claimed that his annexation of the James Island Charter School showed that citizens of the Town are free riding on the City, he was getting little ridiculous. Any burden to the taxpayers of the City of Charleston caused by his spot annexations on James Island are the responsibility of Mayor Riley.
I must admit that I find Sunrise Park very nice (I apologize to those immediate neighbors who aren't so happy about it.) While I don't go there frequently, I go there more often than to our own Dock Street Park. So, I must thank Mayor Riley and the taxpayers of the City for allowing us to enjoy Sunrise Park. And I welcome them to visit Dock Street Park.
At the level of grand public policy, I favor multiple jurisdictions. This allows a variety of combinations of levels of taxes and provision of public services. It provides the residents of a metropolitan area with choice, just like the free enterprise system provides for a variety of goods and services that cater to a variety of tastes. Those who want extensive and ample provision of government services can live in a community that provides such services to its residents and charges high property taxes. And it isn't just the over-all level of provision, some communities can provide more services of one type, like parks and recreation, while another community can have better garbage pick up.
More importantly, competition provides protection against unjust exploitation--taxing one group of people to provide services that solely benefit some other group of people. For example, taxing people who like to go to rock concerts in North Charleston to subsidize the provision of classical music in downtown Charleston. In my view, the proper role of government is to provide services that benefit everyone. Of course, those who live in one jurisdiction cannot tax citizens in another jurisdiction. However, the existence of competition makes it difficult for a city to tax one segment of its own citizens to provide services they don't want, but others do. People will move, or more realistically, when some of them move, fewer people will move in to replace them if they are treated as nothing but a source of funds. The existence of competing jurisdictions helps protect those living in the City of Charleston from exploitation.
What about wasteful duplication of services? This is a very important concern, and that is why I support contracting out. The practice of each municipality providing all services themselves does lead to waste. The way to combine multiple jurisdictions that compete for residents with efficient provision of public services is for municipalities to purchase services for their citizens from the neighboring municipality or private provider that is most efficient.
As for downtown economic development, it is hard to imagine that the Mayor of a major tourist destination would worry so much about citizens of the Town enjoying these amenities. Consider the Waterfront park. It does add something to the attractiveness of the City of Charleston as a tourist destination. Much of the benefit goes to the downtown merchants, especially restaurants. They pay high property taxes for those locations. And, of course, those businesses receive that money back by selling products to the tourists. And by selling to people from the Town of James Island.
If you see the free market economist in me celebrating competition, you should not be surprised. What I find surprising is that after eight years of Mark Sanford and our newly elected governor, Nikki Haley, that Mayor Riley still thinks that the public policy of this state is for big city mayors to control all of the surrounding suburban communities so that they can fund big urban government. Don't bet on it.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Ben Road
The first Town of James Island accepted Ben Road into the Town's Road Maintenance system. We have 7 other earth roads, and Ben Road would make eight. However, when the first town was closed down by the City' of Charleston's first suit, the county refused to recognize the Town's acceptance of Ben Road. And so, Ben Road returned to the status of "community road."
When I was on Town Council in the second town, I heard nothing about this. And as far as I know, the previous administration for the third town was not made aware of what the first town did either. We have been treating Ben Road as a community road.
I think it is time to recognize the action of the first town.
Unlike other community roads, the plat for the properties around Ben Road show a 50 foot easement that is dedicated to the public. For the typical community road, the plats either don't show the road, or show it following various property lines, with the road divided more or less down the center. The right half of the road belongs to the property owner of the right side, and the left half of the road belongs to the property owner on the left side. Sometimes a community road will cut through a property owner's land. That segment of the road is entirely owned by that property owner.
It is my goal to obtain easements dedicated to the public for all community roads. What we want is the standard 50 foot easement. We are asking the property owners on those community roads to give these easements too the town. When we have such easements for a community road, or even a significant segment, we will accept those roads into the Town's maintenance system (with approval of Town Council.)
The town will accept responsibility for maintaining these roads in their existing state. As funds become available, we will work to improve those roads, starting with bringing them up to the level of standard earth roads.
Currently, any public maintenance of community roads is legally suspect. I think it is obvious that there is a significant difference between the typical community road on James Island, and a private road in a gated community. It is not, however, clear that judges will agree. We need to fix this problem. And we are working on it.
Ben Road, however, already has a 50 foot easement dedicated to the public. The first Town of James Island accepted it. With the approval of Town Council, I want to recognize that Ben Road is the Town's 8th earth road, and start taking care of it.
When I was on Town Council in the second town, I heard nothing about this. And as far as I know, the previous administration for the third town was not made aware of what the first town did either. We have been treating Ben Road as a community road.
I think it is time to recognize the action of the first town.
Unlike other community roads, the plat for the properties around Ben Road show a 50 foot easement that is dedicated to the public. For the typical community road, the plats either don't show the road, or show it following various property lines, with the road divided more or less down the center. The right half of the road belongs to the property owner of the right side, and the left half of the road belongs to the property owner on the left side. Sometimes a community road will cut through a property owner's land. That segment of the road is entirely owned by that property owner.
It is my goal to obtain easements dedicated to the public for all community roads. What we want is the standard 50 foot easement. We are asking the property owners on those community roads to give these easements too the town. When we have such easements for a community road, or even a significant segment, we will accept those roads into the Town's maintenance system (with approval of Town Council.)
The town will accept responsibility for maintaining these roads in their existing state. As funds become available, we will work to improve those roads, starting with bringing them up to the level of standard earth roads.
Currently, any public maintenance of community roads is legally suspect. I think it is obvious that there is a significant difference between the typical community road on James Island, and a private road in a gated community. It is not, however, clear that judges will agree. We need to fix this problem. And we are working on it.
Ben Road, however, already has a 50 foot easement dedicated to the public. The first Town of James Island accepted it. With the approval of Town Council, I want to recognize that Ben Road is the Town's 8th earth road, and start taking care of it.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Walking in Harbor Woods
Some neighbors from Harbor Woods took a walk in the woods Saturday morning.
At the meeting Tuesday night, a victim of one the burglaries reported that he had entered the woods near his house, followed a shady character, and found his wife's purse on the trail.
Sure enough, while Regatta ends at Harbortown, there is a well-worn trail by the last house of Habortowne. Right behind the house is a drainage ditch, and on the far side, the place where many people have scrambled up the bank was clear.
At the meeting Tuesday night, a victim of one the burglaries reported that he had entered the woods near his house, followed a shady character, and found his wife's purse on the trail.
Sure enough, while Regatta ends at Harbortown, there is a well-worn trail by the last house of Habortowne. Right behind the house is a drainage ditch, and on the far side, the place where many people have scrambled up the bank was clear.
The maintenance shelf on the city's drainage ditch was in great shape. (And the ditch looks good too, I'm jealous!)
There is a trail running through the woods between James Island Charter High School and new fenced in field. Sure enough, it ends on a gravel road that goes between the back ball field and the new fenced in field purchased by the School Board.
We will see what we can do.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Ditch Maintenance
Thank you!
Thanks to all of those citizens of James Island who keep the drainage ditches on their property cleaned out. Cutting the brush and mowing the grass is a big help. Pulling out branches and other debris is a service to your community.
As we all know, some people have gentle swails in front of their house. Maintaining it is no different from the rest of your yard. For others, the ditch gets bigger, and in a few places on the Island, it begins to look a bit like the Grand Canyon. Still, some maintain even these ditches. Thanks!
But for some of our frail or elderly residents, maintaining the deeper ditches is impractical. Contact Town Hall at 762-7744 or email publicworks@jamesislandsc.org. It may take some time, but we will take care of it.
Please, never dump leaves, grass clippings, or any other debris in the ditches. It is wrong. It blocks up the ditches and can cause flooding upstream. To the degree your debris moves downstream, they may stop and the flooding may come to your yard! Do you expect your downstream neighbors to clean it up? Or do you want to put an additional burden on the Town's limited budget.
So, thanks again to all of those citizens to can and do make the extra effort to keep the ditches clear. And, one more time. Those of you dumping yard debris into the ditches. Stop!
Thanks to all of those citizens of James Island who keep the drainage ditches on their property cleaned out. Cutting the brush and mowing the grass is a big help. Pulling out branches and other debris is a service to your community.
As we all know, some people have gentle swails in front of their house. Maintaining it is no different from the rest of your yard. For others, the ditch gets bigger, and in a few places on the Island, it begins to look a bit like the Grand Canyon. Still, some maintain even these ditches. Thanks!
But for some of our frail or elderly residents, maintaining the deeper ditches is impractical. Contact Town Hall at 762-7744 or email publicworks@jamesislandsc.org. It may take some time, but we will take care of it.
Please, never dump leaves, grass clippings, or any other debris in the ditches. It is wrong. It blocks up the ditches and can cause flooding upstream. To the degree your debris moves downstream, they may stop and the flooding may come to your yard! Do you expect your downstream neighbors to clean it up? Or do you want to put an additional burden on the Town's limited budget.
So, thanks again to all of those citizens to can and do make the extra effort to keep the ditches clear. And, one more time. Those of you dumping yard debris into the ditches. Stop!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)