The county’s tax-assessment staff presented certified roll and “no new revenue” calculations on Aug. 4, and the commissioners voted to publish a combined proposed tax rate that is lower than the current year's rate but still expected to produce additional revenue because the taxable base grew.

The presentation, delivered by a county staff member who said they verified signed certification from the tax office, explained that the current general-fund maintenance and operations rate is 0.3736 (37.36 cents per $100 valuation). The staff member said the county's no-new-revenue rate is 34.8748 cents and the voter-approval rate is about 36.0954 cents and recommended a maintenance rate of 36.0 cents (0.36). The presenter also reported a current debt-service rate of 3.9552 cents and an adjusted debt-service projection of 3.5005 cents, and recommended a road-and-bridge rate of 13.4 cents, producing a proposed combined rate of 52.9005 cents per $100 valuation for publication.

Why it matters: because the county's taxable base increased substantially this year, publishing a slightly lower tax rate can still raise more revenue overall while keeping the rate below the voter-approval threshold that would trigger an automatic election. The staff member said the county's general-fund tax base rose from about $1.835 billion last year to about $2.058 billion this year; at the adopted published rate the county's general-fund levy would rise from roughly $6.8 million to roughly $7.4 million, an increase of about $552,000 despite the lower rate.

Details and supporting remarks: the presenter described the county's legal thresholds (the no-new-revenue calculation and the voter-approval rate) and walked commissioners through the three component rates (general operations, debt service and road & bridge). The presenter noted that some new property types — including transmission lines, pipelines, wind turbines and solar generation — are often excluded from preliminary certifications and can appear in the final certified roll, which contributed to the larger-than-expected final tax base. When asked about timing for specific projects, the presenter said a nearby solar project was expected to be operational in December and would count on the next year's roll only if it was producing by Dec. 31.

Action taken and next steps: Commissioner Farmer moved to accept the presented rate; Commissioner Clark seconded. The court approved the publication of the proposed tax rate for the statutorily required notices (recorded on the meeting docket as accepted for publication). The staff member said publishing the rate starts the timelines for the tax-rate hearing and the later adoption meeting.

Context and procedure: the staff member explained that the legislature sets tight timelines for certifying rolls and publishing proposed rates, and that the county typically chooses a proposed rate between the no-new-revenue and voter-approval rates so it does not trigger an election while still addressing inflation and budget needs. The presenter also referenced Senate Bill 22 in the ensuing budget discussion as one of several revenue components county staff consider when finalizing budget allocations.

The county scheduled required public hearings on the tax rate (see separate article on scheduled hearings) and will move from this published number to a formal adoption vote at the later meeting.