Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Tax Rate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manassas council signals $1.28 advertised tax-rate ceiling during budget work session
Summary
At a budget work session the Manassas City Council signaled support for advertising a $1.28 property tax ceiling, reviewed $2.1 million in unassigned funds and $3.56 million in unfunded requests, and discussed school funding, senior tax relief and transit supplements.
At a budget work session, the Manassas City Council indicated by a show of heads and verbal confirmation that it will advertise a tax rate ceiling of $1.28 per $100 of assessed value — an advertised figure that, council members and staff repeatedly emphasized, is a not-to-exceed number and not a final tax rate.
The council’s discussion centered on how advertised tax-rate choices would affect available one-time and ongoing funding. Staff told the council it has $2.1 million in unassigned funds and identified roughly $3.56 million in total unfunded requests, and council members debated whether to use unassigned money, data-center revenue or other sources to meet priorities including school requests, senior and disabled tax relief and community programs.
The advertised-rate decision is procedural: staff explained that advertising a higher ceiling preserves flexibility as the council continues budget discussions. A staff member summarized that “that is an advertised tax rate only. It’s not to exceed,” and reminded the council that more detailed decisions will follow during the formal budget votes.
Key figures discussed included a supplemental payment of $300,000 to transit providers OmniRide and the Virginia Railway Express (VRE), which staff said is funded from the city’s gas tax and added into the proposed budget. Staff also told the council the $2.1 million in unassigned funds is the staff-recommended pool from which some of the council’s priorities could be drawn.
Council members examined how small reductions in the residential real-estate rate would affect revenue. Staff said a 2-cent reduction in the rate would reduce available unassigned funding by roughly $1.5 million to $1.6 million; a 3-cent reduction would produce a larger drop. Council members discussed whether to hold some revenue — including any potential data-center receipts — in reserve rather than placing it in the base budget, because future data-center revenue was described as uncertain.
School funding drew considerable attention. Multiple council members urged waiting to finalize allocations until the city hears a presentation from the school division and gets clearer information on state and federal funding for schools. Staff said it had asked the school division to identify priorities and to make transparent any additional state funding so the council can evaluate net needs.
Council members also raised senior and disabled tax-relief rules after property assessment notices went out to residents. One council member asked staff to return with cost estimates and options, and staff said the Commissioner of the Revenue is preparing material for a future work session to explain possible ceiling changes for elderly and disabled relief.
Other operational items on the council’s agenda included scheduling presentations from the airports and the utilities department on the capital improvement program. Council members discussed timing and noted federal developments affecting airports and FAA planning as a reason to hear directly from airport staff.
Votes at a glance - Resolution R-2025-515, authorizing a closed meeting to discuss terms and conditions for the sale of city-owned real property: motion by Vice Mayor Wolf; second by Council member Vasquez Luna; roll call recorded the named members voting "yes." Motion carried. (See actions for full vote record.) - Resolution R-2025-516, certifying the closed meeting: motion recorded as made and seconded; roll call recorded the named members voting "yes." Motion carried.
The council continued the budget discussion with staff and scheduled follow-up items, including further review of the unassigned funds list, a school division presentation and a subsequent work session devoted to non-tax-supported funds and the utilities CIP.
Ending Council members emphasized the distinction between advertised and adopted rates and reiterated that the advertised figure preserves flexibility as they continue hearings and receive additional budget detail. The council adjourned after adopting the two resolutions related to a closed meeting and its certification.
