site_news:site_news

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision		 Previous revision
site_news:site_news [2026/03/27 22:59] – editorsite_news:site_news [2026/03/30 00:02] (current) – [02/24/2026 BOS Meeting : The "Proposed" 2026/2027 Budget is Presented] editor
Line 69: Line 69:
 ====== 02/24/2026 BOS Meeting : The "Proposed" 2026/2027 Budget is Presented ====== ====== 02/24/2026 BOS Meeting : The "Proposed" 2026/2027 Budget is Presented ======
  
-Ref Agenda Page -> [[https://www.hcspotlight.org/doku.php?id=board_of_supervisors:meeting_agendas:2026:02_24|02-24-2026]]\\+Ref Agenda Page -> [[https://www.hcspotlight.org/doku.php?id=board_of_supervisors:meeting_agendas:2026:02_24|02-24-2026]] <- Files may be viewed or downloaded from this page.\\
  
-In another exhaustingly long presentation—the better part of six hours—the proposed budget included several increases. The presentation referenced a 115-page document and was conveniently scheduled during County staff’s standard working day, ensuring that the vast majority of taxpayers couldn’t attend.+In another exhaustingly long presentation—the better part of six hours—the proposed budget included several increases. The presentation referenced a 115-page document and was conveniently scheduled during County staff’s standard working day, ensuring that the vast majority of taxpayers couldn’t attend.  The budget document is available -> [[https://www.hcspotlight.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=board_of_supervisors:meeting_agendas:2026:fiscal_year_2027report_for_board.pdf|here]].
  
 I understand exactly why it’s presented in such an extended, protracted fashion. It’s an indoctrination process that achieves Board “buy-in,” co-opting a part-time BOS as they listen to the “difficulties” staff face, the “great work that’s being done,” and statements like “this is an expensive business,” along with “we have no choice,” etc., etc. I really don’t understand why the Board sits through these sessions year after year. The BOS is unlikely to follow up on any of the budgetary information, nor will they examine online data to see the obvious trend—that the cost of local government is already out of control. With that said, the process is effective. The Board seems willing to rubber-stamp the increases requested, with little to no pushback, despite citizens objecting to them. I understand exactly why it’s presented in such an extended, protracted fashion. It’s an indoctrination process that achieves Board “buy-in,” co-opting a part-time BOS as they listen to the “difficulties” staff face, the “great work that’s being done,” and statements like “this is an expensive business,” along with “we have no choice,” etc., etc. I really don’t understand why the Board sits through these sessions year after year. The BOS is unlikely to follow up on any of the budgetary information, nor will they examine online data to see the obvious trend—that the cost of local government is already out of control. With that said, the process is effective. The Board seems willing to rubber-stamp the increases requested, with little to no pushback, despite citizens objecting to them.
Line 79: Line 79:
 This is the issue with the BOS listening to all of this during a “work session,” where the public can not speak.  The public has no voice during the process and, as time wears on, the BOS falls into a mode where they simply want it to “go away.” The easiest way to do that is to rubber-stamp the request, regardless of the effects on taxpayers. This is the issue with the BOS listening to all of this during a “work session,” where the public can not speak.  The public has no voice during the process and, as time wears on, the BOS falls into a mode where they simply want it to “go away.” The easiest way to do that is to rubber-stamp the request, regardless of the effects on taxpayers.
  
-During this meeting, a spreadsheet was shared with the Board—but not with the public—regarding the “cents per hundred” tax rates (I’m guessing, based on years past). In the comments, I heard references to “higher” rates in the past. What must be kept in mind is that the “rate” multiplied by the “value” equals the effective tax (which, in the case of Highland County, has been rising for years). The rate, without the assessed value, means next to nothing. Just to better understand why something like this would be presented to the Board, I requested the document. +During this meeting, a spreadsheet was shared with the Board—but not with the public—regarding the “cents per hundred” tax rates (I’m guessing, based on years past). In the comments, I heard references to “higher” rates in the past. What must be kept in mind is that the “rate” multiplied by the “value” equals the effective tax (which, in the case of Highland County, has been rising for years). The rate, without the assessed value, means next to nothing. Just to better understand why something like this would be presented to the Board, I requested the document.  This document is now available -> [[https://www.hcspotlight.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=board_of_supervisors:meeting_agendas:2026:past_tax_rates.xls|here]].
 \\ \\
  
  • site_news/site_news.1774652365.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2026/03/27 22:59
  • by editor