Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax File Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County temporarily cuts Cambridge Central Schools’ $1,500 tax‑file fee to $500
Summary
After hearing from Cambridge Central Schools about a $1.7 million budget deficit and technical reasons the district maintains its own tax platform, the Washington County board voted to reduce the district’s $1,500 county tax‑file fee to $500 for one year while staff and the vendor explore reintegration.
James Duchar, superintendent of Cambridge Central Schools, asked the Washington County board to reduce a $1,500 fee the district pays to receive the county’s tax file, saying the district faces “a huge budget deficit of about $1.7 million” and seeks any savings it can find.
Cambridge moved its tax‑file workflow onto a vendor platform that spans properties in two counties, the superintendent said, and now pays the county for a file extract the district uses to populate its system. County staff explained that the file the county distributes (the “160D1” file) is how outside entities, private buyers and some nonprofits obtain parcel and payment information; private purchasers typically pay $1,500 for that file.
County staff told the board that the vendor (Systems East) provided Cambridge a separate platform combining Washington County and Renolier County parcels, which created extra processing steps on the county side until the vendor implemented an export/import workaround. Staff cautioned that a zero or large discount could prompt other participants to leave the county system, increasing manual workload and potentially requiring additional county staffing.
Duchar asked the board to treat Cambridge “like a not‑for‑profit” and suggested $300 as one option, but he left the final amount to the board. After discussion of options — including bringing Cambridge back onto the county platform or setting the district’s fee at the same maintenance rate charged to other school participants (staff cited roughly $382–$400 as the typical maintenance fee) — a supervisor made a motion “to reduce fee for $500 for the one year while we work on bringing them back into the system,” and the motion was seconded.
The board voted in favor of the temporary reduction and instructed staff to continue working with Cambridge and the vendor to find a longer‑term solution that avoids extra manual processing for county staff. The county clerk and IT staff were asked to consult with Cambridge’s collector and the vendor about technical import options and to report back within the committee’s timetable.
The committee chair closed the item by encouraging the Cambridge superintendent to exchange contact information with county staff and reiterated that the reduction applies for one year while the parties explore whether the district can be re‑integrated into the county’s system.
