Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 6 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
From Page A-l
► Taxes
Bingham opposed this cut, while Piedmont District representative Charles K. “Pete” Estes, StonewallHawthorn District representative Robert Anderson and Wakefield District Hubert S. Gilkey voted for the cut.
After extensive discussion of whether to fund the fire departments out of general funds or a special fire levy. Col. Bingham’s motion to adopt a three-cent fire levy on real estate and a 20-cent increase to the personal property rate for a fire levy with the general real estate tax rate remaining at 69 cents won support from Mr. Gilkey and Mr. Estes.
An earlier motion by Mr. Massie to fund the request of the fire and rescue squads out of an increase in the general real estate tax rate of four cents and the 20-cent increase in the personal property tax lost 2 to 3 winning support from Mr. Anderson but none of the others.
For a while it appeared no proposal could get the three votes needed to pass, as Mr. Estes suggested a twocent fire levy and a one cent increase to the general tax rate.
He argued that since this is the first year in which the county will be picking up bills for operating the fire departments, they don’t know what will be needed. He said there seems to be an inequity in the amounts going to the various departments, and if they went over the amount raised by the fire levy, the general fund could pick up the rest. He was also concerned that with the current budget, the surplus will be drawn down since estimated spending exceeds expected revenue by about $75,000.
Other members said the estimate of costs for operating the fire departments were based on actual spending in 1994 and that “non recurring capital expenses” account for more than the deficit.
Col. Bingham led the effort to use
93.8%