By SHARON KILPATRICK

By SHARON KILPATRICK

Rappahannock News Staff Writer

If Rappahannock's elderly are granted real estate tax relief, it won’t be in the next tax year.

That was the decision of the Board of Supervisors following a public hearing Monday evening in which few spoke clearly for tax relief for the elderly, but many spoke against land-use taxation.

The supervisors voted to have County Administrator John McCarthy try to find out how much tax revenue might be lost if relief were restricted to the elderly who have less than $12,000 or $15,000 in income and to report back after the budget for next year is adopted and the tax rate is set.

When Chairman Hubert Gilkey first asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the tax relief, nobody spoke. Then when he asked if anyone wanted to speak against, Claybert Smoot said, “If it’s done, I’d like to see it done fair. So much is going on here that’s not fair.” He added that he also did not want a system where the taxes would be added back later on.

Mr. McCarthy explained that some counties defer taxes until after the owner dies or the property is sold.

Jackson District representative Ellis Bingham said, “There’s where the double-edged sword is. We can’t eat these taxes. Those taxes have to come from somewhere. If we benefit the elderly, we put an added burden on the younger generation. We’re going to have to look at the whole ball of wax.”

Carson Johnson wanted to know if the county had any figures. Mr. McCarthy explained that the cost would depend on the percentage of relief granted.

“I don’t see how we can set the thing up without knowing what effect it’s going to have on the tax base . . . My tax bill has doubled every year since we went into land use,” Mr. Johnson said.

(According to tax records at the Commissioner of Revenue’s office, between 1982, the first year of land-use taxes, and 1988 Mr. Johnson's taxes increased from $612.54 to $1,985.36, an increase of 330 percent. If his taxes had doubled in each of those years he would have had an increase of 6,400 percent. During those years Mr. Johnson also added two houses and remodeled another on those same properties, which also increased their value.)

“This is one I’d like to do unfairly,” said StonewallHawthom District representative Nelson Lane, who had resigned earlier in the day. “I’d like to see it benefit only native-born Rappahannock people. We don’t want people retiring out of the Washington, D.C., area to come to Rappahannock for tax relief.”

Hampton District representative Mike Massie said, “If we do away with land use, taxes would drop for a cou