Property tax rates and the Magnolia Independent School District recently utilizing a provision for districts in counties declared as disaster areas prompted Rep. Rob Eissler, Chair of the House Committee on Public Education, to seek an opinion from the Attorney General asking five questions on these issues:
1) Subsection (a) of Section 26.08. That subsection exempts from a rollback election a tax rate “necessary to respond to a disaster, including a tornado, hurricane, flood, or other calamity, but not including• a drought, that has impacted a school district and the governor has requested federal disaster assistance for the area in which the school district is located … for the year following the year in which the disaster occurs”. Must a school district hold an election to approve a rate previously adopted under subsection (a)’s disaster exception in a year following a rate set pursuant to that exception?
2) Under Section 26.08 the calculation of a rollback rate in subsection (n) involves a sum of maintenance taxes based on the district’s tax rate in 2005, plus an additional $0.04, plus any increment of taxation previously approved at an election, plus the district’s “current debt rate” for bonds. However, the requirement to hold an election in subsection (a) applies to the “district’s rollback tax rate”, which appears to be the sum of the different maintenance tax rates plus any tax for the payment of bonds. Legislators have understood that the general reference to a total tax rate in subsection (a) does not override the more specific components of the rollback rate calculated in subsection (n). Subsection (a) puts a single tax rate to voter approval because the whole rate must be adopted or rejected; it was not intended to allow a school district to mix the components after making the calculation in subsection (n). May a district, having computed a rollback limit as a sum of those different rates under subsection (n), set different maintenance and debt rates from that calculation without an election, so long as the total tax rate does not exceed the rollback limit?
3) Subsection 26.08(c) provides that, following an affirmative vote in the rollback election, “the tax rate for the current year is the tax rate that was adopted by the governing body.” That provision appears to be unclear as to whether the school district board of trustees is required to adopt the rollback rate approved by the voters, or could instead choose to adopt a lower tax rate. May a school district board of trustees adopt a rate lower than the .rate authorized in. a rollback election?
4) Subsection 26.08(n)(2)(A) of the Tax Code includes in a rollback limit calculation “the rate that is equal to the sum of the differences for the 2006 and each subsequent tax year between the adopted tax rate of the district for that year if the rate was approved at an election under this section and the rollback tax rate of the district for that year”. However, Subsection (n) provides for two alternative calculations in subsections (n)(2)(A) and (n)(2)(B), directing the district to a limit that is the lesser of the two. If the voters of a school district approve a rollback election, is the district permanently entitled to the additional increment of taxing authority and, if so, is that entitlement constrained by the alternative calculation under (n)(2)(B)?
5) Some districts have found that the estimated appraisal roll declines substantially when a certified roll is received and would prefer to use a projected amount more in line with historical experience. May a district calculate its rollback limit based on a district-generated projection of taxable value if the district has not received a certified taxable property appraisal roll?
For a complete copy of the AG request, please visit: http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/rq/2009/pdf/RQ0839GA.pdf
