Henderson tables talks on tax measure

Henderson residents will not see a property tax ballot question until at least 2016, and even then it’s not a certainty.

Henderson City Council unanimously decided Tuesday to table discussion of a ballot question to address the city’s infrastructure deficit until after the 2015 Legislature to see if state lawmakers take any steps to lift a 3 percent property tax cap adopted in 2005. The state approved the cap to prevent homeowners from being priced out of their residences by rapidly increasing property taxes.

Mayor Andy Hafen said during the 80-minute discussion that with the Legislature meeting next year, and other steps being taken by the city to reduce costs and generate more revenue, it is not clear now how much of a proposed tax increase the council should recommend for a ballot question.

“What I’m hearing tonight is nobody on this board has said anything denying we need an increase because we do,” Hafen said. “I want input from our residents on how they want our city to be.”

A ballot question to raise Henderson property tax 20 cents per $100 of assessed value was recommended by a citizen’s Special Budget Ad Hoc Committee in February to help pay for $170 million in infrastructure needs anticipated for the coming decade. Infrastructure includes money to maintain roads, parks, building maintenance and vehicle replacement.

The 2005 property tax cap prevents the city from recouping what it lost when property values dropped sharply during the economic downturn, City Manager Jacob Snow said. Henderson’s property tax revenue for the 2015 budget is projected at $59.7 million, down from the 2009 peak of $85.7 million.

Councilman John Marz predicted that the Legislature will not remove the cap, but would give the City Council the ability to override the cap. Even if that happens, Marz said the council still needs to pursue the ballot question and live with the decision of voters.

“This $17 million a year is not going away ladies and gentlemen,” Marz said. “It’s here and the longer we put that $17 million off, the bigger it’s going to become. The worse our infrastructure is going to get.”

Councilman Sam Bateman said he has not seen an indication that there is support for a tax increase now and that the council should not put it before voters without strong support.

“I don’t think the community, from everything I’ve gathered, would vote for this,” Bateman said.

Not all residents who attended Tuesday’s meeting agreed with the decision to delay a ballot question.

Resident Robert Anderson said waiting for the Legislature is just delaying the inevitable ballot question.

“I don’t believe for one minute the Legislature is going to fix this,” Anderson told the council. He added that placing the measure on the ballot is giving residents the opportunity to have an open dialogue about the type of city they want.

“Put it on the ballot, let the citizens of this community vote on it,” he said. “If it’s going to be voted down, it’s going to be voted down and everybody shares.”

A 20-cent increase would add $122.50 to the tax bill on a $175,000 home. The property tax rate of 71 cents per $100 of assessed valuation has not changed since 1991. By comparison, the tax rate in Las Vegas is $1.06 per $100 of assessed valuation, while North Las Vegas is at $1.16 per $100 of assessed valuation.

Snow said the city is close to balancing its operating budget, and the city does not plan to use reserve funds next year to keep the city running. Snow said this has been achieved by service cuts, fee increases in parks and recreation and deferred maintenance.

COUNCIL MEETING DATE CHANGE

The City Council will meet on Sept. 9, instead of Sept. 16 for its second meeting of the month. Two council members, the mayor and some city staff will be at a Federal Emergency Management Agency training session in Maryland during the week of Sept. 16, so the council approved the date change in the spring.

Contact Arnold M. Knightly at aknightly@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3882. Find him on Twitter: @KnightlyGrind.