This is part of our Cardinal Way project on promoting civil discussions. See also “The private sector can’t replace public pools or libraries in Lynchburg. Here’s why.” by Geoffrey Kershner of the Academy Center of the Arts in Lynchburg, and fill out this short survey to tell us what you think.
There has been a general assumption over the past two decades that all monies generated by Lynchburg citizens are money for government to spend. To perpetuate this false belief, members of city council have called any decrease in the requested increase in spending a spending cut. It is also why citizens are misled in the current discussion regarding property tax equalization.
There is not any proposal being considered that reduces city funding generated from the property tax. There is, however, a city budget built on a 13%, or $9 million, property tax increase that is built into a budget that proposes dramatic increases in city spending.
If we oppose this increase in spending, it is called a dramatic budget cut, and if we hold taxes level, it is called a reduction in city revenue. It’s time to end the doublespeak, explain things as they are, and it is time to get creative.
In the state of Virginia, municipalities determine the real estate property tax through two factors: the property valuation and the real estate tax rate. Neither factor can function independently of the other. So, the tax rate itself is an arbitrary number unless tied to specific property valuations because it is the two in tandem that determine city revenue from the real estate property tax.
Many Lynchburg citizens received notice that their property values more than doubled in this past two-year real estate assessment cycle.
What is being represented as a “tax cut” is really “equalization.” Equalization is a tax rate reduction in correspondence with a valuation increase. The equalized rate is determined by a projection of maintaining level city revenue.
Even when the property tax is equalized, however, the city can still receive more money than in past years. This happened last year, due to increases from other sources (sales taxes, fees, growth), city revenue and the overall operating budget still increased with equalization.
Inflationary costs, tariffs and market instability are crushing many Lynchburg citizens. It is not the time to take on $11 million in debt service to level and rebuild a pool complex when the “leak” in question can likely be maintained with $8,500 a year.
The primary focus of Lynchburg city’s debt service capital improvement projects needs to be on critical infrastructure and deferred school maintenance.
In my private capacity, I had the privilege of running a national nonprofit where I often leveraged resources from multiple groups toward a common objective. We have the same opportunity here.
Let’s take food deserts.
While in California, my husband and I ordered our groceries from a group called Imperfect Foods. Imperfect Foods battled food waste by taking produce and other viable food items that failed to meet an industry standard, but which were still safe, and repurposed them through discounted food boxes shipped directly to customer doors. Their model largely utilized warehouse space for storage and packaging. Why not incentivize a similar model to set up shop in a warehouse located in one of Lynchburg’s food deserts? College students would benefit from the service and be a viable market, we would reduce Lynchburg’s food waste, and — in exchange for incentivized warehouse space — they would open a small storefront as part of their operation. I’ve spoken with a private individual who may donate warehouse space to the effort.
For the library: What if we made the library more accessible through utilizing our community centers? Workforce development, computer access and community resources are immensely valuable to upward mobility. Being able to access these resources within walking distance could help transform neighborhoods while encouraging community identity and connection around the valuable hub of our community centers. I have spoken with a private donor who is interested in helping to fund computer labs. Additionally, the city could partner with a local nonprofit to create a “resource officer” that would rotate between the different community centers, connecting citizens with workforce development, housing and transportation opportunities.
And the pool: Volunteer lifeguards would never work, but a privatization deal that protects public use may.
It is time that we explore options available to us that allow Lynchburg to navigate turbulent economic times while fostering community partnerships and sustainable growth.
Lynchburg is an incredible city because of its people. Let’s keep the people we have by not taxing them out of the city. And while Lynchburg may love you, it’s time that we love Lynchburg by buying into community potential — not through compulsory taxes in a turbulent economy, but through creative thinking and sustainable partnerships.
Jacqueline Timmer is a member of Lynchburg City Council.
