07 Record Vote - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ment in the property tax-setting process, and it has achieved that to a point. There is obviously more information available and greater opportunity to be informed. However, there is evidence that TNT is not necessarily being used to the fullest advantage, by either taxpayers or taxing entities. If we go back to the four princi- ples outlined by the comptroller's office, there is no question that property owners should be made aware of the changiug assessed value of their property. This is a reflection of real estate market conditions val- idated by the countywide appraisal process and confirmed by the statewide comparison performed. However, it would seem that affected property owners have opportunities to address property tax issues via the mea~as contained within the maiority of home rule charters, those being the public budget work sessions and maudated public hearings. The methodology to analyze year-to-year tax burden, the original intent of TNT, has been modified and revised numerous times as the regulations attempt to accommo- date the various exceptions that have occurred since passage of the original legislation in 1979. It may be that a "clean slate" approach to this issue is appropriate to address the variances that have been identi- fied in a systematic manner, accom- plishing the intent of the legislature while not burdening local govern- ment with excessive efforts to pro- vide the necessary information. Do taxing entities really need to publicize their citizen access points more? With many cities exploring the Web-enablement of their organ- ization and with an increasingly computer-literate citizenry, man- dated newspaper advertisements with specific headline-point sizing may not be the most effective means to communicate for many cities. Plus, the confusing and controver- sial language contained within those notices probably deserves some attention to more appropriately express the intent of that notice. And finally, are £rced percentage thresholds really the most appropri- ate measure of changes in the local property ~x burden? Is there a more realistic means to determine whether the actual tax burden has changed, and relative to what? It is obvious that the need for full disclosure of facts relative to the setting of local property tax rates exists, and that taxing entities are sensitive to the expectations of their taxpayers. However, as TNT has Preserving Community Character The Second Annual Conservat|on Development and Smart Growth Symposium ® Noted keynote speakers Randall Arendt and Ed McMahon ® Work Sessions · Design Exercises · Conservation Development Tours Friday, June 29 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Circle R Ranch Flower Mound, Tex~s Registration is $100 / $ 35 Student Rate. For more info or to register, contact The innovation Groups at 8007772509 or abake~'~ig.org. evolved over timc, ir would seem that we are at thc point where there are more adjustments being made to the formulas to acknowledge variances than actual information being presented. In our ef~brts to assist the taxpayer, we may have lost sight of the original objective. Maybe it's time for a disarma- ment treaty. * 2001Water printed in the May 2001 s Town and City, two cities were inad- left out. Following is the information for ~ulati0n 73,344 25,453 $11.34 al/m0nth $18.59 lal/m0nth $76.59 $270.09 residential use: 8,000 gallons 24,O96 lse: S15.02 $26.87 Ose: $121.67 $477.17 19~445 71,000 rUse: $16.53 gal/month S24.43 $107.75 $346.46 residential use: lO,O00 gallons 72,O90 $10.38 $85.28