County Commission members are backing further away from signing up for a tax free program for seniors.

Commission Chairman Bill Hullander suggested the commission instead beef up the existing senior tax relief program, but some commissioners did not go along.

Commissioner Richard Casavant said, "I am very concerned about the county getting into income redistribution. It's a road I feel we shouldn't travel."

He added, "I know the pressure is on us to join the legislature's tax freeze program, but I don't want to take either route."

Commissioner Fred Skillern said seniors have unrealistic expectations for the tax freeze program.

He said, "Some think they are never going to have to pay taxes again on anything."

Commissioner Skillern said such a program might lead some families to have younger members transfer their homes to seniors.

Commissioner Hullander said the tax freeze program would not help any seniors until the commission passed a tax increase. He said then it would only be about $50 of relief on a $100,000 house.

He proposed instead giving a $90 lump sum from the county to go with a $183 tax break from the state on the current tax relief program.

The current program is at a level of $24,000 income and is due to rise to $24,750 next year.

The tax freeze program has an income level of $32,000.

Commissioner John Brooks said implementing the tax freeze program would be "a logistical nightmare. It would cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars" and bring just small benefits to seniors.

County Mayor Claude Ramsey said joining the senior tax freeze program would further complicate figuring what the adjusted tax rate should be during a reappraisal year because a number of seniors might join the program after the rate is set.

Louis Wright, county finance director, said the tax relief program is already in place with income verification by the state, while the tax freeze program would require an extensive new setup to compute it.

Curtis Adams, chairman of the committee dealing with the knotty issue, said the group would meet again in two weeks "to get more confused."

Meanwhile, the president of the Chattanooga Association of Realtors, urged caution in proceeding toward a senior tax freeze. It says:

Dear Hamilton County Commission:

The dependence on taxes levied on real estate property is well documented and it is unlikely that county and local municipalities will ever be able to separate themselves from current tax models to provide for and manage government services. In its broad based nature, a property tax represents a more equitable tax, rooted in the proportion of one’s property. Still, property taxes remain one of the most unpopular ones paid at the local level and often become an expedient target for cuts and modifications.

When the state of Tennessee offered a new means for local governments to provide a local option property tax freeze for qualifying seniors, it was widely hailed throughout the region. It is reasonable that the Hamilton County Commission would look to the possibility of freezing taxes for some senior citizens. In fact, it is an admirable goal for any local governing bodies to seek out opportunities to help more property owners keep a larger share of their income, particularly for those most in need.

The Chattanooga Association of REALTORS® urges caution and further study before advancing any proposals to freeze local property tax rates for one segment of the population. There is a need for a clear understanding of the broader, long term repercussions of creating such a tax structure. We respectfully ask our elected officials to exercise restraint in moving forward with such a freeze.

As it stands, too many questions and unknowns loom over the tax freeze debate in pockets across the entire state, not just in Hamilton County. First, the technical and administrative costs incurred in the implementation and general management of a system tailored to specific needs has not been created and truly cannot be quantified. True fiscal responsibility should be fully measured and understood before moving forward.

Next are the effects of the lost revenue. It is inevitable that any time taxes are cut, the revenue pool will be diminished. This can result in less spending for infrastructure, public safety, schools, public services and all those other important things provided by our local governments.

Property and business owners need to understand the more realistic side of this debate and see that losses in revenue could soon result in higher taxes and increased fees. The higher financial burden would likely be put on the backs of the proportion of the community not able to qualify for relief, despite being ones who may be most in need. Is it right to see the father or mother of a young family work an additional job to afford their tax liabilities and keep their home? Such potentials for unfair revenue grabs could cause businesses and individuals to look at any region with a penchant of raising taxes in a negative light.

Clearly, a tax freeze is especially hard to justify as these questions can be applied in counties and municipalities across the state of Tennessee, many of which are reeling from budget shortfalls and looking for new revenue streams. It is probably why less than 15 percent of all counties have implemented this tax freeze option in the short time it has been available. Even according to some of our own County Commissioners, there are members of county governing bodies who wonder if they did the right thing in initiating such a tax freeze. Perhaps we should consider the approach taken by Putnam County Commissioners, who instead chose to vote to delay any such tax freeze until they could study the affects on other county governments. There is time to do the same in Hamilton County.

Perhaps better than most, realtors understand the need to provide relief for those most in need and certainly empathize with those who are confronted with overwhelming mortgage and tax payments. But this untested tax freeze is an experiment in government financing and brings with it several reservations for our community. Are we prepared for the potential problems that may stem from lost revenue, cuts in services and further declines in local schools?

Again, and even in despite of the public aversion to them, property taxes are fairly designed to be evenhandedly assessed on all property. They are progressive in their nature because they need to be. Plus, the state does already offer economically feasible tax programs for many of our senior citizens looking for relief – and has been doing so for many years. Through better education of these relief measures more homeowners could be seeing the assistance they need. REALTORS® stand ready to help with the promotion of these programs by making those buyers who may qualify aware of their options and potential sources of relief.

We commend you for your commitment to public service and all the good work you do to help make this a great community to call home. Too often, your job is a thankless one and we appreciate your ability to stand up to the public and political pressures you face in making what can be tough decisions. It is at this time we ask all our elected officials to again use their care and consideration, and see the need to pause and gain a better perspective on this issue.

Making the cost of living more affordable for all our citizens is an effort we can always applaud. However, instead of this tax freeze, we want to see our elected representatives working to enhance the entire community’s quality of life, seeking a better balance between affordable taxes and superior services for all. Please contact Chris Sexton, our public affairs director, with any questions or concerns. We offer realtor assistance in any way we can to support this important process.

Sincerely,

Pam Duffy, president
Chattanooga Association of Realtors