Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Proposal to raise mineral severance tax by 5¢ per ton fails for lack of a second
Summary
Commissioners discussed a state-authorized increase to the county's mineral severance tax that supporters said would generate roughly $47,000 a year for highways, but a motion to adopt the increase failed for lack of a second.
Get email alerts on the Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A proposal to increase the county's mineral severance tax by 5¢ per ton failed at the Aug. 4 meeting for lack of a second, after debate about exemptions and how the revenue would be used.
Why it matters: supporters said the 5¢ increase would provide additional, dedicated revenue for the highway department to pay for asphalt and road improvements; opponents or those requesting more time questioned exemptions and the effect on local gravel prices.
Details of the discussion: County staff and Highway Department representatives explained the proposal references earlier county resolutions and recent state legislation that allows counties to increase the per-ton severance rate. A staff presenter said, based on last year's volumes, the 5¢ increase would yield about $47,000 for the highway department. The presentation noted agricultural uses and specific lime/limestone uses are excluded under Section 4 of the referenced resolution; several categories of lime/limestone and industrial uses were read into the record as exemptions.
Outcome: Commissioner Whitfield moved to adopt the increase and to earmark the revenue for asphalt work. The motion received no second and therefore failed for lack of a second.
Discussion versus decision: the transcript records substantive Committee discussion about revenues, exemptions and future tiers (the proposal was described as part of a potential multi-step raise that could reach a higher cap in future years), but no formal increase was adopted at this meeting.
Ending: supporters said the increase could be reconsidered in the future; without a second, no ordinance or resolution was adopted and the current severance rate remains unchanged.

