Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge caution on county sales tax, citing fixed incomes, rural fairness and calculation clarity
Summary
Multiple residents raised concerns during public comment: fixed‑income households and students would pay more sales tax while some residents—particularly in neighboring rural counties—would receive no property‑tax relief; a former state property‑tax official asked staff to clarify that credits shown apply only to the county portion of tax bills.
Several residents used the commission's public‑comment period to press for clarity and fairness if Brookings County considers a sales‑tax credit under SB96.
Dennis DeBoer, who signed in to speak, asked whether he would effectively "pay this extra property tax to reduce my property tax," and warned that elderly, disabled and low‑income residents could be harmed by higher sales taxes. "In other words, if you factor in what I gotta pay in for this extra tax, if you really ain't gonna see that much back in return," DeBoer said. Larry Tiedemann reminded the commission that state sales‑tax receipts have experienced notable downturns—in 2008–2010 and during other shocks—and said regional leakage (residents shopping in Sioux Falls or other counties) would not benefit Brookings County.
Jim Shady, who said he helped draft owner‑occupied provisions in the past, asked whether staff had calculated only the county portion of owner‑occupied taxes; Beller confirmed the examples showed county taxes only and not city, school or special‑district levies. A Moody County resident argued the proposal would be "a scam" on rural residents who shop in Brookings but would receive no relief. Commissioners responded that these are material distributional concerns and said they want more data before acting.
