15% are you crazy! Freeze salaries, Freeze Hiring! Stop the madness. When property values drop a mim of 20%, you think a 15% cut is valid. WAKE UP!

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Funnyguy,
Why bother? If the property values go down 20 - 25% then the BOS will raise the tax rate by 28 - 33%. The $7.3 million in savings noted in the article is a drop in the bucket. The change in property values, up or down, has no bearing on the overall increase in taxes? Face it, there will be another increase. They have increased our property taxes by over 100% in under 10 years with the excuse that our homes were worth more, (so we should pay more). This time they will say that there is a shortfall and we have to fill the budget gap with higher taxes. No matter what happens with the economy or the home values, you can count on yet another tax increase. Probably in the range of 10 - 15%. Have you seen the education bond proposals? Loudoun residents always vote yes. This adds $60 - $100 to your taxes every year for 20 to 30 years and we have new bonds every year, and so on and so on. It is the cost of living here in Loudoun and fighting it is a losing battle. We either pay the higher taxes each year or we move. The choice is ours to make but the taxes and the increases are here to stay. As long as we are a growing community and as long as our school system is desirable, this will never change. I am sorry Funnyguyva but griping about it is futile...

Posted by salm624 (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks, salm624, I know your right but the squeey wheel gets the grease. Plus I can't stand the spin and posturing of the BOS or the LCSB.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 1:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

One million dollars? The LCSB is outta their minds. We either renegotiate the whole enchilada, or tell Greenvest to go fly a kite. The market CHANGED severely over the past 11 months. Greenvest,themselves,realized this when they appealed to the BOE to revalue their property to a much lower worth, but then the LCSB made a RIDICULOUS offer with OUR tax money. Make them renegotiate based on the rezoned worth, and that number will be much less than the $$million dollar drop.

Posted by honchonumberone (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dean, you forget that the site acquisition money was voter approved years ago, and they are getting a dual site.

In addition, the BOE appeal has not yet been granted, and may not be at all.

However, if it is, bear in mind that valuation as of January 1 should have been based on:

*no utilities, which the seller will provide to the school site

*no paved road access, which the seller will provide to the school site

*no parcel subdivision, which cost the seller will bear in creating the (improved) school site out of raw TR-1

*the current land use status of the property. Funny, all the transition zone multi-group activists used to pound the heck out of this, but as you are apparently pretty well aware, if either the owner or a tenant engages in land use, there is a land use valuation for tax deferral on property. If the property is sold, that triggers the rollback taxes.

The costs of continued delay and busing will not make this any cheaper you know.

And please do talk to the At Large Representative to (her own personal issues supposedly involving) Parks and Rec: she was at the school board meeting last night (AGAIN not disclosing her position) to say "use eminent domain" on something unbuilt in South Riding, especially if it's retail.

Tell me again how condemning commercial property is a much cheaper, better solution?

In addition, she needs to overcome the hypocrisy of using unbuilt numbers of by right units in the transition zone as something that may never be built, if she is going to turn around and use unbuilt approved units in the suburban area as if they already exist.

She can't have it both ways, even if she is super special.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 29, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

$100/year? I think that's being too generous. My mortgage payment went up $200 a MONTH thanks to those dingleberries in the BoS - and my property is valued in the low 300s. I can't imagine what happened to the people with jumbo mortgages - are they paying THOUSANDS extra?
Unfortunately, I suspect you're right regarding the bonds - because no expense can POSSIBLY be spared for the children, right?!

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 6:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, there ya go Hoqenishy. Many of us who have those jumbo mortgages also have the kids who need to be educated. We ARE paying more than many others, just as you wish.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 6:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Now that my child is old enough to be in school, I'm not really sure what my increasing property taxes are paying for. We've been, frankly, underwhelmed by the Loudoun County school system. Lots of coloring, cutting and glueing, video watching, computer game playing (although the kids are limited to one game per day). And this isn't kindergarten, mind you. The class has substitute teachers more than I'd like to see and on those days, of course, the kids do nothing. The teacher has spent the first two months of the school year primarily evaluating the kids in order to group them for math and reading. Two months to evaluate 24 kids? And this is in a school where there really aren't many low-income or ESL students, if any at all.

Posted by jt12 (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We have had excellent experiences with the Loudoun County schools our children have attended during the past nine years. If you have a concern about the educational content of your child's class, I would recommend going through the proper channels to address the issue. There is always room for improvement.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Funnyguy, I only hope they freaking freeze my salary. I have been with the County for a little under 20 years and was told yesterday that I will be losing my job come July and to not tell others because it will cause other employees to become frantic. I wish the public could see how much money truly does get wasted. All of you would be shocked!!!

Posted by itzazoo (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So they are going to drop the $18M pricetag by $1M? And yet Greenvest wants the property appraised at just under $4M. I can't be the only one who sees the disconnect here. No, I don't have any children (so I can't deduct them), ensuring that I pay more than my share of taxes to the system (since I'm on the hook paying for the other ones to go to school). I'm not the only one in this situation either.

Posted by ms1234 (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The disconnect only looks good if you don't know any facts:

The land appraisal should reflect the condition of the property as of January 1. At that time there were no utilities, there is no road access into the property other than a farm lane, it is not divided into lots, and it is in land use.

None of those conditions apply to the property used as the best comp on the county appraisal.

The site to be delivered has the seller bearing the cost of subdividing the parcel (which raises the value of the land as a whole--lots are more valuable than raw acreage), will have utilities and will be served by paved roads, which raise the value substantially.

In addition, when any property comes out of land use (through sale or otherwise), the taxes deferred during the land use period come due. IOW, the county gets its money back that has been deferred for Greenvest letting someone use the property.

Everyone is allowed to appeal an assessment; it doesn't mean this one will be granted. Nearly anyone with land can put it in land use, either by their own efforts or by leasing the use of the land.

That includes real farmers who make a significant percentage of their gross income from agriculture and animal husbandry, people who own land yet do not have the personal ability or desire to farm it themselves, the globally wealthy or retired DC VIPs and national press bigwigs who get a tax writeoff for "open space" or five sheep on their estates, and even evil greedy developers.

That's what the law and the process IS.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

itzazoo I am sorry for your recent unemployment. This is an example of just how hard times are getting. I honestly have sympathy for your situation. I too have lost a job in the past so I can speak of the feelings you are having. I can’t tell you where the greed and selfishness started. I can tell you that we (the citizens of Loudon County) have been blinded with the notion that if we poor money into the school system and give them everything they want, our kids will be the best educated in the United States. This dream has now become a burden on the community. We can no longer allow Dr. HATRICK to have a blank check. This is crisis times and his ideas are to protect the little empire he has created. Well, it’s going to crumble brick by brick. You sir will survive and prosper in the days ahead, don’t let the greed of others make you bitter. Good things will happen for good people.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No, momof2, my 'wish' is that parents would directly pay more of the cost of educating their kids. My guess is that you're still not paying anywhere close to what it costs to educate your two children, and as a result, we get more school bloat and more taxes, but no fix for Rt. 7.

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 5:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

itzazoo - I doubt I would be shocked at the wastefulness. The recent school budget evaluation that found a pithy 1-2 million to trim also indicates extreme incompetence. If Loudoun had to be run like a "real" business, they would be trimming 15% in the first year alone. Instead, they try to squeeze blood from a stone by begging for bonds and proposing a 4% tax on food, under the guise that our children will be out on the streets unless we all start paying more taxes.

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 6:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)