MURPHY – The Cherokee County Board of Commissioners approved a property tax increase that will cost property owners an additional $10 per year per $100,000 in assessed value to address pay issues and high turnover in local government jobs.
The board met earlier this month and discussed personnel pay and taxes – the prickliest issues remaining after weeks of workshops ahead of a final budget.
The board polled approval of the tax increase with Commissioner Mark Stiles voting against it. The board will formalize the decision when it meets to approve the annual budget later this month.
The change will increase the county’s portion of the millage rate from 6.1 to 6.2 mills, with proceeds of around $400,000 per year going to bring county employees into alignment with an existing pay plan.
All employees with the required time in will be brought to the step that they qualify for up to the midway point. Employees who are already where they belong in the pay plan will get their own pay bump, with no employee getting less than a 3% raise.
Commissioner Ben Adams led the charge, the only board member to admit support for a tax increase at the start of the meeting.
After more than an hour of debate, he was joined by Chairman Alan Bryant and commissioners Jeana Conley and Sue Lynn Ledford, who were recently appointed to the board after then-commissioners Cal Stiles and Dan Eichenbaum resigned.
Last year’s board, which included Cal Stiles, Eichenbaum, Adams and Mark Stiles, faced similar spending issues and balanced the budget by redirecting sales tax revenue that was previously used by the schools.
Last year’s budget did not address issues with the county’s pay plan.
“We’re dealing with the sins of our forefathers,” Ledford said.
Not fully for a tax increase, Ledford worried that the tax increase would further harm housing affordability.
Although the county operates under a pay plan, many employees have been left behind, and many departments – including law enforcement and emergency services – have been dealing with high turnover.
The situation somehow resulted in some employees making more – hundreds to thousands of dollars more – than others with almost the same experience.
The board had other options, including a 5% cost of living adjustment that would have kept taxes level but which would not have addressed problems with the pay plan and employee turnover.