Surry County adopts personal property rate, leaves real estate rate unchanged at 71¢

The Surry County Board of Supervisors voted to set the fiscal-year personal property tax rate at $3.75 and to leave the real estate tax rate unchanged at $0.71 during a public hearing and budget discussion on the proposal.

County staff presented the budget and supporting materials before the hearing, detailing revenue drivers, reassessment impacts, one-time and recurring items and a proposed capital improvement program. The presenter said the proposed budget relies on a mix of recurring revenue and one-time inflows, and recommended a one-year approach to the county’s CIP for fiscal 2026.

The presentation outlined several key figures: a limited-scope reassessment reduced the county’s sales assessment ratio and required removing $422,000 from projected revenues after a preliminary 97% sales ratio; county leaders earlier approved a $340,000 supplemental transfer to schools that would have been covered by a 100% sales ratio had that ratio held. The presenter also said a change in the timing of personal property billing produced a one-time revenue influx of about $1,100,000. "Real estate taxes, $972,000 based on a limited scope reassessment," the presenter said, and added that one penny on the tax rate equals roughly $384,000.

The county expects about $225,000 in tax relief for elderly and disabled veterans in 2025, up from roughly $121,000 in 2021, the presenter said. Solar farm operations have contributed roughly $552,000 to current real estate tax totals and about $1.9 million cumulatively since 2019, the presentation noted. Staff described major expenditure drivers including transfers to schools, revenue stabilization set‑asides and one-time CIP funding, and identified $1.4 million proposed for CIP projects funded primarily from a 3¢ dedicated tax set-aside and the revenue stabilization fund.

During the public hearing, two residents asked the board to postpone action or reduce the personal property burden because of recent reassessments and the timing change for personal property billing. "Since the personal property payments we all made in December should have provided the county monies till December of '25, I'm suggesting the county give some reprieve to the citizens and reduce their personal property this year, possibly in half," said Susan Corbello, a Claremont District resident. Corbello also urged the board not to raise the real estate rate above 68¢ if it chose to increase it and asked for more time to review CIP and audit documents.

Another Claremont District resident, Brian Acor, commended staff on the budget work but urged delaying final action so residents can review materials; he described a prior reassessment that produced a substantial increase in his assessment and said keeping the same tax rate after reassessment still produces a high tax bill for some households.

Following brief board discussion, a motion was made and seconded to set the personal property tax rate at $3.75 and to keep the real estate tax rate at $0.71. The board chair called the voice vote; the motion carried and the board adjourned to a future public hearing date on the budget.

The presentation also listed other notable items: a recommended transfer to schools equivalent to a one‑cent tax increase plus funding for one maintenance position at $148,000; an expected increase of about $400,000 in local sales tax projections; an anticipated $75,000 increase in ambulance billing revenue tied to policy and fee changes; and proposed one‑time CIP items such as repairs to county facilities, one refrigerated food truck recommended at about $77,000 (staff noted two were requested but only one was proposed for funding), courthouse maintenance and replacement of aging body-worn cameras on a multi-year schedule.

Board members thanked staff for the presentation and opened the public hearing before taking the vote to set tax rates. The record shows public comment was limited to three minutes per speaker under the county’s rules for citizen comments.