Public Hearing for Public Safety Income Tax

22 May

2016 County Council MembersThe Monroe County Council will be holding a public hearing at our work session this Tuesday to consider an additional county-wide income tax rate of 0.25% to fund public safety expenses (the “public safety local option income tax” or PS-LOIT). The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, 2016-05-23 at 5:30 PM at the Nat U Hill room in the Monroe County Courthouse.

There is a lot to this issue, and I’ll try to cover all of the salient points as briefly as possible. I’m sure I will forget something important, however!

What is the Public Safety LOIT?

Currently, our local option income tax rate is 1.095%, made up of a 1% County Option Income Tax (COIT), which is shared among the county, the cities and towns, the townships, the public library, Bloomington Transit, and Perry-Clear Creek Fire Protection District. The remaining 0.095% is a Juvenile County Option Income Tax (J-COIT), which is earmarked for county juvenile services, including the Binkley House Youth Shelter, the Juvenile Court, and Juvenile Probation. The revenue generated by the new public safety LOIT would be shared between the County, the City of Bloomington, and the Towns of Ellettsville and Stinesville. In addition, the fire departments that serve the townships are able to request a share of the funding — more about this later.

What Would the Money be Used For?

Screenshot 2016-05-21 21.41.05The revenue is statutorily earmarked for public safety, which includes pretty much what you would think it does: police/law enforcement, fire protection, emergency ambulance, emergency medical services, emergency action, probation, community corrections, juvenile detention, jail, 911 communications systems, medical and health expenses for inmates, and police and fire pensions. More specifics on what expenses are permitted can be found in the enabling statute: Public Safety Tax IN CODE.

The discussion about the public safety LOIT here in Monroe County was initially sparked by discussions about putting the county’s unified 911 dispatch center on firmer footing. The operations of the dispatch center is funded through a mixture of the E-911 tax on phone service (currently $1/month for wireless and landline phone service and $1/transaction for prepaid wireless) and Monroe County and City of Bloomington general fund revenues. In 2015, Monroe County spent $291K out of its general funds for the dispatch center, and the City of Bloomington spent $1.14M. Only $574K came from E-911 taxes — an amount that is likely to either remain flat or decline. Neither the Town of Ellettsville nor any of the township fire departments currently pay directly for the operations of the dispatch center.

The enabling statute for the public safety LOIT specifically allows a percentage of the revenue to be earmarked “off the top” (i.e., before the rest is given to Monroe County, the City of Bloomington, and the Towns of Ellettsville and Stinesville. The current proposal is for 30% of the revenue to be earmarked for the operations of the dispatch center.

IMG_4350

Monroe County 911 Dispatch Center

However, while the needs of the dispatch center sparked the initial discussion,  all of the public safety providers in the county have substantial long and short-term unmet demands that this additional revenue could help address. The City of Bloomington administration has said that replacing aging vehicles and capital equipment (fire and police) would be their top priority for the funding.

While we as a County Council have not yet discussed our priorities as a body, previous discussions have identified both additional police officers and a community corrections center/work release center as very high priorities. The need for additional community corrections capacity in particular is necessitated by recent changes in the state law that push the responsibility for lower-level felons to counties. This is an important topic that deserves its own detailed discussion. And our sheriff’s deputies are spread far too thin out in the county. Adding additional deputies is a particularly high and urgent priority for me.

In a state that makes it nearly impossible for local governments to raise revenues to meet the demands and costs of service, this LOIT may represent our only opportunity for our community to raise revenue for critical public safety needs.

 

How Much Revenue Would the Public Safety LOIT Raise?

The statute allows for an income rate of up to 0.25% to be adopted. The current proposal is to adopt the maximum of 0.25%, and earmark 30% for the dispatch center. Using 2016 county option income tax receipts to estimate. the LOIT would bring in approximately $6.96M annually. Of course, as this is an income tax, the actual receipts depend on the income earned by Monroe County residents, and thus could go up or down.

If the proposal for 30% for dispatch is adopted, the dispatch center would receive approximately $2.1M annually. Combined with the E-911 tax on phones, this would fully fund the dispatch center, eliminating the need for the county and city to subsidize the dispatch center out of their respective general funds. The ordinance that would impose this tax makes it easy to change the 30% number, depending on the actual budget requirements of the dispatch center. This topic may see some debate during the Council’s public hearing.

After the $2.1M for dispatch is deducted, approximately $4.87M would be available for distribution to the county and the three cities and towns. Although the public safety tax is an income tax, revenue is distributed according to a formula based on the relative property tax footprints of each unit. My estimates are as follows:

Screenshot 2016-05-21 22.53.59

So the county would receive approximately additional revenue $2.3M for public safety expenses, as well as the approximately $300K that it currently spends on the dispatch center that it would no longer need to spend.

Who Passes the Public Safety LOIT?

Here it gets a little weird. The body that is empowered to pass the public safety LOIT (as well as other local option income taxes specifically for counties that have adopted the County Option Income Tax (COIT) is a little-known institution called the County Income Tax Council.

The County Income Tax Council is not a regular deliberative body with individual members. Instead, it is  a “virtual council” that rarely, if ever meets. It is defined by statute as follows:

Every county income tax council has a total of one hundred (100) votes. Every member of the county income tax council is allocated a percentage of the total one hundred (100) votes that may be cast. The percentage that a city or town is allocated for a year equals the same percentage that the population of the city or town bears to the population of the county. The percentage that the county is allocated for a year equals the same percentage that the population of all areas in the county not located in a city or town bears to the population of the county. On or before January 1 of each year, the county auditor shall certify to each member of the county income tax council the number of votes, rounded to the nearest one hundredth (0.01), it has for that year. (IC 6-3.5-6-3)

In other words, this council is made up not of individuals, but of fiscal bodies of other units of government.

In Monroe County, the county income tax council is thereby made up of the fiscal bodies of the county (the Monroe County Council) and the fiscal bodies of each of the municipalities in the county — the Bloomington City Council, the Ellettsville Town Council, and the Stinesville Town Council.  As described above, the votes are allocated amongst these bodies in proportion to their populations (and the county is given the population only of the unincorporated areas). For 2016, this means that each body gets the following “votes” on the income tax council:

  • Monroe County Council: 36 votes
  • Bloomington City Council: 59 votes
  • Ellettsville Town Council: 5 votes
  • Stinesville Town Council: 0 votes

Poor Stinesville winds up rounding down to 0!

All votes are cast by the body as a whole — in other words, all of the Bloomington City Council votes as a single bloc, Monroe County Council as a single bloc, etc.

What is notable about this is that the Bloomington City Council has a simple majority of votes on the income tax council — therefore, it has the power to pass, or deny, taxes that apply to the entire county. The rest of the votes of the bodies on the income tax council, including those of the County Council, are essentially symbolic. I have criticized this arrangement in the past as coming close to taxation without representation: The Phantom Council and Personal Property Taxes.

But What About the Fire Departments?

As I mentioned before, any public safety LOIT revenues not earmarked for the dispatch center get divided up among the County and the three cities and towns. However, while fire protection within the city or town limits is the responsibility of the respective cities and towns, and thus the city or town can simply spend some or all of its share of the revenues on their fire departments, fire protection outside of the city/town limits is NOT funded by county government.

Screenshot 2016-05-21 21.44.44Instead, fire protection is funded by property taxes (and some share of income taxes) at the township level, unless the townships have  combined their fire protection responsibilities into a fire protection district or fire territory. Monroe County has one fire protection district (Perry-Clear Creek Fire Protection District, which includes Perry Township and Clear Creek Township) and is in the process of creating a fire territory (Northern Monroe Fire Territory, which includes Bloomington Township and Washington Township). However, the Northern Monroe Fire Territory will not be established in time for the purposes of the public safety LOIT this year.

Indian Creek, Bean Blossom, Benton, Van Buren, and Bloomington Township all have fire departments. The City of Bloomington Fire Department by contract provides fire protection to Salt Creek and Polk Townships. The Ellettsville Fire Department provides fire protection to Richland Township.

So why does this all matter? The public safety LOIT statute allows fire departments providing service to political subdivisions not already entitled to a distribution of public safety LOIT revenues (i.e., the fire departments serving the townships) to request funding from the income tax council on an annual basis for the subsequent year.

In practice, this means requesting funding from the Bloomington City Council, since they have the majority of votes on the income tax council. So the township fire departments are requesting funding from the Bloomington City Council, and the Bloomington City Council does not represent a single resident served by these township fire departments. Yet another problem with the whole concept of the income tax council! Incidentally, there was a bill in the recently-concluded session of the general assembly that would have entitled the townships to a distribution from the public safety LOIT as well as the cities and towns — however, it didn’t pass.

In any case, by statute, the fire departments must make their requests for funding to the income tax council before July 1 for the subsequent year. The decision by the income tax council must be made before September 1. Therefore, the tax itself would need to be established before July 1, in order for the fire departments to have any revenue in place for the 2017 budget.

So How Much Is This Going To Cost You?

Currently the Monroe County local option income tax rate is 1.095%. To see how this compares to other counties, see 2016 Local Income Tax Rates — How Does Monroe County Compare? If this public safety LOIT passes, our rate will be 1.345%. It would cost a taxpayer with an adjusted gross income of $50,000 an additional $125/year.

Public Hearing

The statute that allows this public safety LOIT can be found here: Public Safety Tax IN CODE. Here is the County Council packet that includes the resolution that will be considered, that casts the County’s votes on the income tax council in favor of establishing the public safety LOIT: Council_Work_Session_Packet_20160524. The packet also includes a resolution that the County Council will consider that clarifies some procedures regarding any requests by fire departments for funding for service in the townships.

As far as the process goes: the Town of Ellettsville will be taking their final vote on a resolution casting its votes on the income tax council in favor of the public safety LOIT proposal tomorrow evening, Monday, May 23rd. The Monroe County Council will be holding our public hearing Tuesday, May 24th on our resolution for the LOIT. And the Bloomington City Council is scheduled to vote on its resolution (the one that matters!) on June 1st.

 

Hope to see members of the public at the public hearing on Tuesday. And if you have any comments or questions, please feel free to send them to me. I hope I’ve explained the gist of the proposal here — but I’m sure there will be additional questions.

I-69 Section 5 Company Sold to Canadian Pension Fund Manager

17 May

In today’s global finance news, the highway in Bloomington, Indiana that was being built by a Spanish corporation with Netherlands in its name is now owned by a Canadian pension giant.

Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands B.V., the equity member of I-69 Development Partners, the company hired to design, build, operate, maintain, and finance the construction of I-69 Section 5 (from south of Bloomington to Morgan County), has been sold to Public Sector Pension Investment Board (“PSP Investments”), a large pension investment manager with over $112B  in assets under management. Isolux Infrastructure was formerly part of Grupo Isolux Corsan.

The newly acquired business will be called ROADIS.

Word is that all of the subcontractors have now been paid, and it is obvious around town that construction on I-69 Section 5 has resumed in a big way!

IMG_4732

Subcontractors working on Vernal Pike

The full press release on the acquisition can be found here.

2016 Local Income Tax Rates — How Does Monroe County Compare?

17 Mar

WestsideBack in 2014, when Monroe County was considering a small increase in the Juvenile County Option Income Tax, I ran a comparison of Monroe County with the other 91 counties on overall income tax rates (Income Tax Rates in Indiana Counties — How Does Monroe County Compare?). Now that we are starting to hear some calls from public safety agencies for a public safety local option income tax (which would be passed by the Bloomington City Council, not the County Council, incidentally), I thought I’d re-run the comparisons using 2016 local option income tax rates.

Here is a table showing the total combined local option income tax rates for 2016 for each county in Indiana, along with each county’s percentile.

Screenshot 2016-03-17 07.26.43

2016 Local Option Income Tax Rates by County

Monroe is at the 24th percentile rank, which basically means that Monroe County’s income tax rates are in (near the top of) the bottom quarter. Put differently, 76% of Indiana counties have a higher income tax rate than Monroe County.

So how do we compare to our neighbor counties?

Screenshot 2016-03-17 07.31.47

2016 LOIT Rates for Monroe County Neighbors

Monroe County currently has the lowest income tax rates of any of its neighbor counties.

Finally, how does Monroe County compare with its “peer” counties?

Screenshot 2016-03-17 07.35.43

2016 LOIT Rates for Monroe County Peer Counties

Obviously the definition of “peer” county is somewhat subjective, but these counties are ones that Monroe County is typically compared against, in terms of population, urbanization, demographics, etc.  In this comparison, we have the second-lowest income tax rates, second only to Vanderburgh County.

Data Source: Indiana Handbook of Taxes, Revenues, and Appropriations, Fiscal Year 2015

New Road Money for Local Governments

16 Mar

rockport5This past week, House Enrolled Act 1001 and Senate Enrolled Act 67 both passed the Indiana General Assembly, and are on their way to the Governor’s desk. Both have implications for local units of government around the state and here in Monroe County.

SEA 67: Returning Local Income Taxes to the Locals

First, let’s consider SEA 67. This act reduces the amount that the state is required to hold in each county’s income tax trust fund from 50% of the amount that is actually certified to be distributed to the local governmental units in the county to 15%. The trust fund is essentially an escrow account that holds the money collected from local option income taxpayers and that is used to pay out the annual distribution to local governments each year (referred to as “certified shares”). The theory is that local option income tax trust fund balances have been increasing over the years, and too much is being withheld from local governments.

Further, SEA 67 requires the state to make a one-time distribution of ALL of the excess trust fund balance as of December 31, 2014, to local units of government that receive local option income taxes (using the standard procedures for allocating local option income taxes to these units). This includes the county, cities and towns, public libraries, townships, and fire protection districts.

However: for the county and cities and towns, there is a restriction. 75% of the money must be spent on roads and aviation (or deposited in the rainy day fund, and later spent on roads and aviation). The remaining 25% can be spent on any lawful expense of local government. So basically, money that has been collected from local taxpayers, as authorized for particular purposes by local governments — is being given back to local governments by the state, but being restricted in use. And these restrictions only apply to the county, cities, and towns — townships and the public library have unrestricted use of these funds!!

The following table provides my very rough estimate of the amounts that each taxing unit in Monroe County will receive. Note that the total amount distributed to Monroe County ($6,892,000) is based on the latest fiscal note on SEA 67 (authored by Legislative Services Agency). However, it isn’t clear from the fiscal note whether the total is based on 88% of the December 31, 2014 trust fund balances (where the bill started out) or 100% (where the bill ended up). So please don’t take these numbers as definitive — they are simply estimates of roughly what the taxing units might be expecting.

Screenshot 2016-03-14 09.43.34

My Estimates of What Local Governments Will Receive Under SEA 67 (One-Time Distribution)

As the chart shows — Monroe County Government could be receiving approximately $2.7M from its income tax trust fund — however, only $675K would be unrestricted. And remember — this is money that has already been collected from taxpayers.

HEA 1001: Additional Local Option Highway User Tax and New Local Road and Bridge Matching Fund

839DE454-D67C-4C8A-B2C4-1D9CDB7D9303House Enrolled Act 1001, on the other hand, provides additional road funding to local governments through several very different mechanisms: (1) the provision for local units to increase their wheel tax/excise surtax; and (2) the creation of a new matching fund called the Local Road and Bridge Matching Grant Fund.

Wheel Tax/Excise Surtax

Sometimes referred to as a Local Option Highway User Tax (LOHUT), this refers to two separate taxes that must be adopted concurrently: a wheel tax and an excise surtax. Currently, this is the only local option tax available for road funding. The excise surtax portion is a surtax paid at the time of vehicle registration, and applies to cars, motorcycles, and trucks under 11,000 pounds. It is currently $25/vehicle in Monroe County. The wheel tax applies to all vehicles that aren’t subject to the excise surtax, including RVs, tractors, trailers, trucks, and buses. The wheel tax is currently $40/vehicle, except for vehicles under 3000 pounds (i.e., mopeds). Both the wheel tax and the excise surtax in Monroe County are at the statutory maximum (well, until HEA 1001).

The following table from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles shows the current LOHUT rates for Monroe  County:

Screenshot 2016-03-14 21.10.54

Wheel Tax / Excise Surtax Information for Monroe County as of 2016-03-14

Once collected, these taxes are then distributed to the county and to municipalities, and are earmarked for construction, reconstruction, repair, and maintenance of roads in each unit’s jurisdiction. The LOHUT (wheel tax/excise surtax) brought in $1,574,021 (2014) and $1,288,792 (2015) to Monroe County Government respectively.

HEA 1001 provides a couple of additional options for local governments with respect to the LOHUT:

  • It doubles the maximum rate for the wheel tax/excise surtax for counties (i.e., counties would be permitted to adopt up to $50 excise surtax and $80 wheel tax), IF the county is using a transportation asset management plan (see the section on the Local Road and Bridge Matching Grant Fund, below).
  • It allows municipalities (cities and towns) with a population of at least 10,000 to adopt the wheel tax/excise surtax (maximum of $25 for the excise/surtax and $40 for the wheel tax). Formerly only counties could adopt the wheel/excise surtax. To adopt these taxes, municipalities must also be using a transportation asset management plan.

Local Road and Bridge Matching Grant Fund

Bill Williams Bridge in Stinesville

Bill Williams Bridge in Stinesville

HB 1001 also creates a new program called the Local Road and Bridge Matching Grant Fund. The new fund provides a competitive 50-50 match to local units of government for local road and bridge projects that “repair or increase the capacity of local roads and bridges” and that are “part of the local unit’s transportation asset management plan” (a new requirement that local governmental units have a plan for transportation assets and drainage systems and rights-of-way that affect transportation assets).  INDOT (the administrator of the program) is instructed to “give preference to projects that are anticipated by the department to have the greatest regional economic significance for the region in which the local unit is located.” In addition, at least 50% of the grants in each fiscal year are required to be made to local units in counties with populations of less than 50,000.

The grant program is funded from state reserves and one percentage point of the 7% gross retail sales tax (for fiscal year 2018) and 1.5 percentage points of the sales tax for fiscal years 2019 and after.

The local unit must provide their 50% match out of the following sources:

  1. revenues from an increase in the wheel tax/excise surtax rate (see above)
  2. any special distribution of local income taxes (again, see above); or
  3. any  money in the unit’s rainy day fund.

Since most local counties and municipalities, including Monroe County and the City of Bloomington, will receive substantial cash infusions into their rainy day funds from the excess trust fund balances, the goal will be to use this revenue to lever the same amount of money in the new Local Road and Bridge Matching Grant Fund, and effectively double its spending power on local roads.

Tax Abatement Application and Grant Funding for Futures Family Planning Clinic — Preview of Monroe County Council Meeting 2016-03-08

6 Mar

2016 County Council MembersThis Tuesday’s regular session of the Monroe County Council (2016-03-08 5:30 PM in the Nat U Hill Room) will feature several important topics, including a first reading for a tax abatement application for the 3D Stone mill at 6700 S Victor Pike and appropriation of grant funding for the County’s Futures Family Planning Clinic. The full packet for the meeting is available here: Council_Packet_20160308.

The Council will be hearing the first reading (of two) for a personal property tax abatement application from Lily and Kurt Sendek (doing business as L & K Real Estate Investments) for an expansion of their 3D Stone business at 6700 S Victor Pike, in southern Monroe County.

The property is shown below. Note that the property crosses Victor Pike, and includes a parcel that a proposed County greenway (going along the Illinois Central rail line) goes through.

Screenshot 2016-03-06 08.52.49

3D Stone Mill Property, 6700 S Victor Pike

The site currently has 44 full-time employees. The owners are proposing to add a second production shift to the business, which will add approximately 32 new full-time permanent positions, ranging in starting wages from $11 (General Labor) per hour to $20 (Stone Cutter) per hour, plus a supervisor at $25 per hour. Benefits include employee profit-sharing plan and health/dental/vision insurance. The abatement application in the council packet (Council_Packet_20160308) provides more details on positions, wages, and benefits.

The owners are requesting the tax abatement only on personal property (i.e., business equipment) — on the approximately $800,000 in equipment they propose to purchase for the business expansion (including CNC cutting equipment, saws, forklifts, and IT production management system).

Here is a picture of the business. Note that the red lines are caused by an error in the county’s GIS.

Screenshot 2016-03-06 09.05.43

3D Stone Mill

The County Council will be hearing this tax abatement application for the first reading. It has already been reviewed and received a favorable recommendation by the Monroe County Economic Development Commission (EDC). If the County Council votes in favor of this tax abatement at the meeting, a public hearing will be conducted and the Council will take a final vote (“confirmatory resolution”) on the abatement.

Other items up for discussion at the meeting include:

  • The Health Department is requesting the appropriation of funding (as well as creation of budget lines and other housekeeping) for the County’s Futures Family Planning Clinic from Title V, Title X, and Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF)
  • The Legal Department is requesting the appropriation of $40,000 in fees that the county attorneys are allowed to receive in penalties and fees collected from delinquent personal property taxpayers. County attorneys are able to supplement their regular salary by working off-the-clock to collect unpaid personal property taxes. The amount they receive is on top of the taxes actually collected on behalf of the county, so the county does not lose any tax revenue.
  • The Probation Department is requesting the appropriation of $50,000 in grant funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI), which supports alternatives to incarcerating youth.
  • The Veterans Affairs department is requesting an additional appropriation of $41,503, primarily because the county’s Veterans Service Officer position was reclassified and upgraded to full time after the 2016 budget had been set. In addition, $5000 of new training funding is being requested.

As always, the meeting is open to the public, and will be held this Tuesday evening (March 8, 2016) at 5:30 in the Nat U Hill room of the Monroe County Courthouse, and it will be broadcast on CATS. Public comment will be taken. Hope to see you there!

More Discussion about Funding for Volunteer Fire Departments and New Financial Software for the County? Preview of Monroe County Council Work Session 2016-02-23

23 Feb

2016 County Council MembersThis evening’s work session of the Monroe County Council (5:30 PM in the Nat U Hill Room) will feature two topics: funding for volunteer fire departments and potential new financial software for the county.

Funding for Volunteer Fire Departments

At the last regular session, the Council appropriated $5000 for each fire department in the county with a volunteer component (8 total fire departments) from revenues received by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources from timber sales from state forests located in Monroe County.  This was the amount requested by the County Commissioners — $2500 for each fire department from 2014-2015 revenues and $2500 for 2011-2012 revenues (somehow the county neglected to make the distribution to fire departments in 2012).

I provided a little more background on the timber sales distributions here.

The reason for tonight’s discussion is that some councilors, and in particular Council President Cheryl Munson, who has been strongly involved in volunteer fire departments through her service in Indian Creek Township, think that the distribution requested by the County Commissioners ($2500 per department) is too low compared to the need. The statute that requires the timber sales distribution to volunteer fire departments earmarks up to 50% of the timber sales revenue for fire departments, if the Commissioners request it. For this year (2014-2015), this would mean that the Commissioners could have requested up to $4955 per fire department.

The purpose of this discussion tonight is to explore options and interest in providing additional funding for fire departments.  For additional background, here is some data on county distributions of timber sales revenues to volunteer fire departments from 2005-present:

Screenshot 2016-02-23 06.27.38

County Financial Software

A an item that is not yet on the agenda will likely be discussed. The county council is still under discussions to potentially fund the purchase of new financial software. We are considering, upon request from the Auditor’s Office, the purchase of financial software from Low Associates to replace the County’s aging Harris Open Window financial system.

A representative from Low is anticipated to be at the work session to answer Council questions, as will the County’s Director of Technical Services (IT).

Costs of the new software (including installation, implementation, and training) are estimated at $188,236, plus an additional $37,176 in annual maintenance expenses. Discussions will likely center around (1) should the County move forward in purchasing the new financial software; (2) if so, when, and (3) if so, how should we pay for it. Options for funding the software include cash on hand from County Option Income Tax (COIT) revenues, the Commissioners’ Cumulative Capital Development fund, and a potential future General Obligation (GO) bond.

The packet for the meeting is available here: Council_Work_Session_Packet_20160223. However, it probably won’t be particularly useful — there is no detail on the timber sales issue, and the Low software discussion is a last-minute addition.

As always, the meeting is open to the public and will be televised on CATS. Hope to see you there!

 

2016 Monroe County Budget Order — Property Tax Rates and Budgets Approved

12 Feb
Monroe County Courthouse at Night

Monroe County Courthouse at Night

Yesterday, Monroe County received its budget order for 2016 from the Indiana Department of Local Government Finance. This means that the Department of Local Government Finance has approved for Monroe County:

  • The budgets for all taxing units (i.e., county, cities and towns, school districts, townships, public library, special units)
  • The property tax levies and tax rates for all taxing units
  • The property tax rates for each taxing district (i.e., the tax rates that actually affect each property owner)

Here is a chart showing the 2016 tax rates by taxing district (along with the 2013, 2014, and 2015 rates for comparison):

2016 Monroe County Tax Rates by District

 

Tax rates for all taxing districts actually went down this year, except for Bloomington Township and Salt Creek Township. Tax rates for these two districts went up a bit, because of fire debt service payments.

The full budget order can be found here: Monroe County 2016 Budget Order

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 39 other followers