Greenwood council adopts resolution opposing state property-tax changes after staff warns of steep revenue losses

City staff told the Greenwood Common Council on Monday that pending state legislation would sharply reduce the city’s assessed value base, push more of the tax burden onto income taxes and could force cuts to public-safety services — and the council adopted a resolution opposing the changes.

Controller Greg Wright delivered a 45-minute presentation showing how earlier drafts of Senate Bill 1 and a House amendment (referred to in the meeting as House Bill 14‑02) would eliminate several local deductions and the business personal property tax, reduce local assessed value and create new replacement‑revenue mechanics. “We were predicting approximately $6,900,000 in lost revenues because of this change,” Wright told the council, citing an analysis the city received from Reedy Financial Group for AIM. He said the change in deductions would cut the city’s net assessed value by about $1.3 billion and could push Greenwood’s local tax rate up roughly 41 percent on the city’s 70‑cent portion of the rate.

Wright summarized provisions included in the House amendment that had been added earlier that day: elimination of prior homestead and supplemental deductions and creation of new credits and deductions, an option for replacement revenue through a redesigned local income tax system (a 2.9 percent maximum split among county and municipal shares and optional portions for other units), and a $200 per‑residence tax credit. He also said House language folding in S.B. 518 on school‑preference tax sharing with charter schools had been added, but that no fiscal note for that portion had been released at the time of his remarks.

Wright said the net effect of those changes would be lower net assessed values, higher tax rates and more taxpayers hitting statutory tax caps; residents below the current caps would likely see higher bills, while many businesses with large equipment investments would see lower property bills because of elimination of the business personal property tax. “The people most affected by that will be the ones currently below the tax cap,” Wright said, and he warned the council that reducing property‑tax reliance in favor of income taxes would make local revenue more volatile in recessions.

Wright highlighted local consequences the city could face if revenues drop: delaying maintenance, reducing staff or benefits, or cutting services. He noted the city used levy growth appeals in recent years to add firefighters at Station 95 and warned that removing that tool would make future staffing and service expansions more difficult. Wright said the city would reiterate those concerns to state legislators.

Councilmembers moved quickly to act. The council suspended rules to expedite consideration and unanimously passed Resolution No. 25‑05, titled “A resolution opposing property tax legislation that impacts local government without revenue stream replacement.” The mayor planned to present the resolution and the council’s position at the State House the following day, council members said during the meeting.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 25‑05 — “Opposing property tax legislation that impacts local government without revenue stream replacement.” Outcome: passed, second reading 8–0.

Why it matters

City staff framed the bill changes as a structural shift from stable, property‑tax–based operating revenue toward income tax mechanics and one‑time credits. Wright told the council that if income becomes a larger share of local revenue, the city could face immediate revenue drops during recessions and shorter lead time to adjust budgets; by contrast, property tax revenues typically phase in and give local governments time to respond.

Council action and next steps

Council members Campbell and Gibson sponsored the resolution and members voted unanimously to pass it the same night so the mayor could bring the council’s position to state lawmakers. Council members and staff encouraged phone calls to local representatives; Wright said the city had provided legislators’ contact information and urged members to reach out. The city also cited analyses from Reedy Financial Group and AIM as sources for the revenue estimates presented to council.

Sources and limits on what was said

All figures and policy descriptions in this report come from city staff remarks during the Greenwood Common Council meeting; the staff presentation drew on an outside analysis the city shared with the council. Where the staff said a fiscal note or additional language had not yet been released, this article indicates that the fiscal impacts were not available at the time of the meeting.

Ending

Council members said the mayor would carry the resolution to the State House the next day and asked that the public and local stakeholders contact legislators about the potential local impacts.