Editor, The Smithfield Times:

First, thank you for printing your article (“Surry proposes biannual tax billing,” Aug. 21) associated with the twice-a-year taxation of the citizens of Surry County that has been proposed by our Board of Supervisors.

This proposal was not supported by most of the farmers and citizens who spoke at the public hearing on July 18. In fact, only one speaker spoke in favor of the proposal. As a result, the board scheduled a second work session to continue discussions on the proposal.

The initial proposal would have forced both farmers and landowners leasing land to farmers to pay real estate taxes twice a year, which places a large burden on both. Farmers only receive income once a year after their crops are sold in the fall. They then can pay the landowners who have leased land to them. Then both would be able to pay their taxes as currently required in December.

At the second work session a new style of leadership by the board chairman came to light. The new style of leadership is based on belittling fellow board members who disagree and informing fellow board members and citizens in attendance that the citizen who attended the public hearing and spoke against the proposal did not matter because they did not represent a majority of the citizens.

After much discussion, a new proposal was introduced by Mr. Breyon Pierce, the Carsley District representative, and discussed. However, both Supervisors Amy Drewry and Tim Calhoun maintain their position that the proposal is unnecessary since the current county ordinance allows citizens to pay taxes any time during the year, and only a citizen education process was needed to ensure all citizens were aware of this.

The board chairman made a comment that citizens would not pay taxes unless they received a bill. He continued saying that since a consensus of all Board members could not be reached, he wanted to move forward, citing a majority consensus based on himself and the representatives of the Bacons Castle and Crosley districts. He then directed the county attorney to post in the newspaper a new public hearing date as soon as possible and draft changes to the ordinance implementing changes establishing a twice-yearly tax process based on the proposal made by Mr. Pierce and as discussed.

However, the question of why the change was necessary was never answered.

 

Robert Chandler

Smithfield