Aug. 8, 2010
Huntington Prepares for Possible Passage of Tax Reform, But Neither Administration or Council Taking Anything for Granted
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) - Huntington City Council’s Thursday afternoon work session --- attended by only five council members --- went smoothly. Monday’s nights meeting at which the tax reform package comes up for a vote, the session likely will be lengthy as well as emotional.
Director of Finance and Administration, Brandi Jacobs-Jones, outlined additional procedures that the city must take, assuming that the tax reform package wins approval.
Since the package proposed is different than that which has been approved by the state home rule board, the board will have to weigh in on the package, if council passes it. They plan to convene between September 23 and September 29.
Until that time, Jacobs-Jones indicated that Home Rule Board members do not want to meet and discuss the merits of the plan.
Concurrently, the City acting with Home Rule Authority has procedural matters to follow. The tax package must be run twice as a legal notice. It will appear Saturday, August 7 and on Friday, August 13. After the second publication date, the ordinance(s) would be available 30 days for public inspection.
Council must then meet and approve an ordinance that would adopt amendments to its home rule plan. For instance, as originally proposed, the occupation tax was a revenue neutral addition. First reading of the amended Home Rule ordinance would be September 13 and the second reading would be a special call meeting, Thursday, September 23, which is the day of a work session.
If passed, the City must give the West Virginia State Tax Department 180 days notice concerning the adoption of the one percent city sales tax.
As for expectations from the state home rule board, Ms. Jacobs-Jones stated, “We are taking nothing for granted. ” She added that the municipal sales tax and occupation tax were the most controversial aspects of home rule power that the city was granted.
Mayor Wolfe told those council members present --- Jim Ritter, Sandra Clements, Mark Bates, Rebecca Thacker, and Jim Houck --- that the City wanted everything “done the right way. We don’t want it to come back because you did not do this.”
Councilman Houck asked if the home rule board could make recommendations or changes to that which would have been passed by council.
Both the Mayor and Ms. Jacobs-Jones agreed that the board could do so.
One likely challenge will come not from the board --- the constitutionality of the home rule program itself. Members of Huntington City Council have talked of a “friendly” suit. The issue arose during the litigation concerning withholding fire insurance proceeds. However, the matter was settled with assistance from the governor and legislature, so the home rule challenge in that case was moot.
Councilman Ritter described the work on the package to this point as a “long ordeal.” He added, “it’s tough to raise taxes,” then, stated , “I don’t know if [payroll] is the best way. I don’t like it.”
(Editor’s Note: The reform package calls for a 1% occupation tax (maximum individual payment $1,250 i.e. on $125,000 earnings and above; a 1% city sales tax; AND removal of the $3 per week user fee, removal of the B & O tax on manufacturing and reducing the B & O tax on retail and service entities. The ordinances are posted on the City of Huntington Website:
OCCUPATION TAX: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/occupationtaxcode.pdf (36 pages)
SALES TAX: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/article776.pdf
REDUCTION/ELIMINATION: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/bandoreductionordinance.pdf
While Ritter stated he did not like the payroll tax, he has previously stated that he’s leaning toward a favorable vote on the measure. His earlier statement came after a favorable response from the Westmoreland Neighborhood Association following a presentation by council chairman Jim Insco.
Like Ritter, council co-chairman Mark Bates indicated that a similar presentation had been given a mostly positive response by the Southside Neighborhood Association. He said some business owners --- on an individual choice basis --- have discussed returning the 1% to their employees from the businesses saving on B & O taxes.
Councilman Houck extended a type of “last call” for those particularly who have not spoken before council to attend the Monday meeting.
Referring to the balance between city services and city fees, Houck said, “Everybody wants the cream but no one want to milk the cow.”
Finance Director Deron Runyon answered some of the reoccurring questions and/or complaints about the city opting for more efficient collection of current fees before turning to the earnings-related tax:
1. He explained that the City of Huntington has gained about $535,000 from adding out of state vendors to the tax rolls. These vendors are responsible for tax they would incur on items sold to the hospitals or Marshall University
2. The city sent notices to 2,500 customers owing $500 or more in city services giving them a 90 day warning before a lien would be placed.
3. Runyon estimated that $1.94 million has been collected through the use of the city’s out of state collection firm, which receives a percentage of what is collected.
4. The WV Municipal League has through their collection services secured about $185,000 in back B & O tax collection.
5. The city’s legal department files suits for past due fee collection. Runyon did not name specific data on number of suits filed, cost of filing, and amount collected.
Huntington City Council meets at 7:30 p.m. Monday, August 9 in Council Chambers at City Hall. A tax protest prior to the meeting has been rumored.
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
Huntington Prepares for Possible Passage of Tax Reform, But Neither Administration or Council Taking Anything for Granted
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) - Huntington City Council’s Thursday afternoon work session --- attended by only five council members --- went smoothly. Monday’s nights meeting at which the tax reform package comes up for a vote, the session likely will be lengthy as well as emotional.
Director of Finance and Administration, Brandi Jacobs-Jones, outlined additional procedures that the city must take, assuming that the tax reform package wins approval.
Since the package proposed is different than that which has been approved by the state home rule board, the board will have to weigh in on the package, if council passes it. They plan to convene between September 23 and September 29.
Until that time, Jacobs-Jones indicated that Home Rule Board members do not want to meet and discuss the merits of the plan.
Concurrently, the City acting with Home Rule Authority has procedural matters to follow. The tax package must be run twice as a legal notice. It will appear Saturday, August 7 and on Friday, August 13. After the second publication date, the ordinance(s) would be available 30 days for public inspection.
Council must then meet and approve an ordinance that would adopt amendments to its home rule plan. For instance, as originally proposed, the occupation tax was a revenue neutral addition. First reading of the amended Home Rule ordinance would be September 13 and the second reading would be a special call meeting, Thursday, September 23, which is the day of a work session.
If passed, the City must give the West Virginia State Tax Department 180 days notice concerning the adoption of the one percent city sales tax.
As for expectations from the state home rule board, Ms. Jacobs-Jones stated, “We are taking nothing for granted. ” She added that the municipal sales tax and occupation tax were the most controversial aspects of home rule power that the city was granted.
Mayor Wolfe told those council members present --- Jim Ritter, Sandra Clements, Mark Bates, Rebecca Thacker, and Jim Houck --- that the City wanted everything “done the right way. We don’t want it to come back because you did not do this.”
Councilman Houck asked if the home rule board could make recommendations or changes to that which would have been passed by council.
Both the Mayor and Ms. Jacobs-Jones agreed that the board could do so.
One likely challenge will come not from the board --- the constitutionality of the home rule program itself. Members of Huntington City Council have talked of a “friendly” suit. The issue arose during the litigation concerning withholding fire insurance proceeds. However, the matter was settled with assistance from the governor and legislature, so the home rule challenge in that case was moot.
Councilman Ritter described the work on the package to this point as a “long ordeal.” He added, “it’s tough to raise taxes,” then, stated , “I don’t know if [payroll] is the best way. I don’t like it.”
(Editor’s Note: The reform package calls for a 1% occupation tax (maximum individual payment $1,250 i.e. on $125,000 earnings and above; a 1% city sales tax; AND removal of the $3 per week user fee, removal of the B & O tax on manufacturing and reducing the B & O tax on retail and service entities. The ordinances are posted on the City of Huntington Website:
OCCUPATION TAX: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/occupationtaxcode.pdf (36 pages)
SALES TAX: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/article776.pdf
REDUCTION/ELIMINATION: http://www.cityofhuntington.com/pages/pdfs/bandoreductionordinance.pdf
While Ritter stated he did not like the payroll tax, he has previously stated that he’s leaning toward a favorable vote on the measure. His earlier statement came after a favorable response from the Westmoreland Neighborhood Association following a presentation by council chairman Jim Insco.
Like Ritter, council co-chairman Mark Bates indicated that a similar presentation had been given a mostly positive response by the Southside Neighborhood Association. He said some business owners --- on an individual choice basis --- have discussed returning the 1% to their employees from the businesses saving on B & O taxes.
Councilman Houck extended a type of “last call” for those particularly who have not spoken before council to attend the Monday meeting.
Referring to the balance between city services and city fees, Houck said, “Everybody wants the cream but no one want to milk the cow.”
Finance Director Deron Runyon answered some of the reoccurring questions and/or complaints about the city opting for more efficient collection of current fees before turning to the earnings-related tax:
1. He explained that the City of Huntington has gained about $535,000 from adding out of state vendors to the tax rolls. These vendors are responsible for tax they would incur on items sold to the hospitals or Marshall University
2. The city sent notices to 2,500 customers owing $500 or more in city services giving them a 90 day warning before a lien would be placed.
3. Runyon estimated that $1.94 million has been collected through the use of the city’s out of state collection firm, which receives a percentage of what is collected.
4. The WV Municipal League has through their collection services secured about $185,000 in back B & O tax collection.
5. The city’s legal department files suits for past due fee collection. Runyon did not name specific data on number of suits filed, cost of filing, and amount collected.
Huntington City Council meets at 7:30 p.m. Monday, August 9 in Council Chambers at City Hall. A tax protest prior to the meeting has been rumored.
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
