I think people are being led astray by those that will point to percentage increases from the year 2004-2008 as some sort of mismanagement or corruption. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The 2008 Victoria County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is online for all to see. The balance sheet lists the expenditures and revenues.... The only area of concern for me was the Victoria County Airport.... Even if you discount the paper losses(depreciation) the airports seems to be operating on a net loss....
Victoria has an older population which will put a strain on Citizens Medical Center, so just in one area, we should expect to see increases year after year, after year. The renovation projects were long overdue, I remember showing up for jury duty, looking up and wondering if the building was going to hold up..... Leave the budgeting process to the department heads, elected county commissioners, and county judge.
The best thing for our CC would be to have Burns out. He's probably our biggest problem.
"Outcome: The judge ruled in Brannan's favor. He was granted a default judgment."
No default judgment. Find out who Brannan's attorney is and ask him how he's going to worm his way out of this one.
• What good is a flat tax rate if actual taxes are increasing?
• Is it promoted to create the illusion that taxes are flat?
• If the public actually understood that the annual adoption of a flat tax rate has increased their taxes substantially, would it still be promoted as a positive thing?
Anyone else care to answer these?
I strongly encourage you to get involved in the budget process by contacting the various department heads, commissioners, judge, etc. (no matter who gets elected).
I sincerely believe it will alleviate a lot of your concerns and may offer an added perspective to the CC/ County staff.
Get involved. Learn. Teach.
That's a much better way than posting on these forums.
spyderandfly said: "that's exactly how it works. Preliminary budgets are compiled long before anyone knows what the tax revenues will be."
Was it just a coincidence that they happened to need the tax rate set to 0.3986 for 7-8 straight years while assessments rose? The "tax revenues" are what the taxing entity says they are based on the total assessments and the (preferably floating) tax rate they set to generate those revenues. The cart has been pulling the horse.
BS states: "Taxing entities should be agnostic to the total assessments up until the very moment they need to calculate the tax rate based on their required revenues."
uhhhhh , , , in case you didn't know . . . that's exactly how it works. Preliminary budgets are compiled long before anyone knows what the tax revenues will be. A simple phone call could've enlightened you here too.
i agree lamppost, when your business is the only experience you bring to the table, then some disclosure would be nice.
pozzi can run on his past years as county commissioner and people can pick that apart and such. mo just doesn't seem to have much experience in anything.
he really needs to update his website to better express his views.
Lamppost said: "But in another thread, you said Budget is all that matters, so which is it?"
The two are obviously intertwined.---
Lamppost said: "Well, I would hope that property assessments DO NOT stay relatively flat. For some reason, I like my assets to appreciate in value."
Alas, another revelation. I think the number of folks who'd like to stay in their homes without their "rent" going up far outweighs the number of people flipping houses for a buck. This is the heart of my position. Property values should be able to appreciate without taxing entities using it as a device to increase their taxes just because they can. This is one of the biggest farces/fleecings in government. Taxing entities should be agnostic to the total assessments up until the very moment they need to calculate the tax rate based on their required revenues.
As a cursory exercise, I decided to see what the tax rate might have been if property tax collections had only grown at a moderate rate to reflect inflation. Now, this can be a productive exercise, or it can regress into the usual nastiness. It's your call.
Using the average inflation rate of 3% from 2003-08, the 2003 prop tax revenues of $14,513,803 would have grown to $16,825,475 in 2008 — or by about 15.93% compounded (1.03^5). Based on the 2008 tax base of $4,916,758,278, the tax rate would've needed to be 0.3422 to bring in the inflation-adjusted revenue. [3.5% inflation yields a tax rate of 0.3506]
Starting at 0.3986, I believe 0.3500 is attainable in 4-6 years if property values follow the same trend as 2003-08. (I hope not if flat tax rates will be used.) But putting emphasis on the tax rate instead of expenditures only perpetuates the myth. The tax levy is all that matters. If property assessments stay relatively flat, the tax rate won't need to change unless expenditures do.
Let the backlash commence!
It's all coming soon especially a new tax rate @.35, without any budget cuts, economic development without new business contacts, abatements for individuals to remodel their homes, new rules for law enforcement to stay off of personal property without a search warrent, lower appraisals, the demise of VEDC and Randy Vivian, the elimination of campaign contributions by Victoria residents, and most significant the end to the "good ole boy system".
And I'm telling you that default judgment was overturned. It's public record. Happy fishing.
May 3, 2010, civil lawsuitSummary: Former Boss Oil Field Service business partner Jason Brannan filed a civil lawsuit against Ocker. The lawsuit alleged that in addition to owning a competitor company, Ocker Oilfield Services, Ocker began a "pattern of financial mismanagement" with the company he co-owned with Brannan, ultimately, leading to the "gross mismanagement of the corporation."
Outcome: The judge ruled in Brannan's favor. He was granted a default judgment.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Illuminatus said: "Jason Brannan was after all MO's business partner until Jason sued him and won."
Perhaps you should look into this further.
Firedup: "Pozzi had a failing law practice."
That is some information you provided, unless it is yet another LIE. Would you please provide how you know this for a fact.
FiredUp: "If I remember correctly at the LWV forum Ocker shared with us that he started his own business from the ground up and with in somewhere between 2 - 3 years grossed close to a couple million dollars. That is good business and street smarts."
Did you confirm this information with Jason Brannan? Jason Brannan was after all MO's business partner until Jason sued him and won.
it's a private business, so his 'books' are private
fired up, you dont spend any time at vcc, because that course is empty 95% of the time
There is no secret room. Open your eyes. It's right there on the golf course.
Pozzi had a failing law practice. Where are his street smarts? If I remember correctly at the LWV forum Ocker shared with us that he started his own business from the ground up and with in somewhere between 2 - 3 years grossed close to a couple million dollars. That is good business and street smarts. WOW, talk about knowing how to manage and budget.
i played golf at vcc last weekend and went around looking for the secret meeting room, but i guess it's pretty well hidden.
i will search again next weekend.
If you believe that we live an a utopia were there's no deep inside networking or the possibility of unethical practices in these ‘good ole boy’ group then you are living in a fairy tale word. I must admit that is does make one feel warm and fuzzy when we fool ourselves in believing all is well with the world. Don’t stick your head in the sand.
MO is an outside, he's not a part of the victoria pentavirate / victoria skull and bones or whatever underground / secret society group he claims exists in this area and runs our lives.
He may have meant he's not an "insider". Whatever the case, I think the connotation got through.
"Ocker said he's an outsider and he believes that would be a good thing for the county's taxpayers."
I believe the term was used in the sense of "not the favorite horse to win." not as an outsider in the community.
I agree. I wasn't born here in Victoria, but I've made it my home for more than 20 years. Does that mean I'm an "Outsider" and shouldn't have a right to cast my vote?
After I watched the LWV Forum debate the message was clear that Ocker has done his homework, and he delivered a wealth of information that most of us were unaware of. I bet Pozzi is shaking in his shoes. The above article only shows that Pozzi is a taker and Ocker doesn't ask and grab at the cash. If Pozzi is so well liked and has done such a favorable job then he shouldn't need 40K for his campaign. I respect Ocker for pulling himself up by his own boot straps; not having someone else do it. Ocker has mine and my entire family's vote!
Change is often good - but change for sake of change is never good.Don has the experience, education, and street smarts. He is a little older than I am, but I have known him (known of him) for 30 plus years. He would be my choice, bar none. He can clearly stand on his record of service.
Mr. Ocker exhibits the epitome of negativity, therefore I would never vote for him.
What makes this guy a businesman?
Although, all of our present incumbents state they have experience, wisdom and knowledge in order for us to have change, we must elect others to achieve this change. We have seen and heard what the present incumbents have done for us and are we really satisfied with these results. I really believe the time for change is now and with different personnel..