What you pay depends on where you live

  • Follow Metro

Like many residents of Augusta, Chess and Elfriede Howard have city trash service.

Back | Next
Residents of Augusta's urban and suburban tax districts pay for their city trash service in two ways. Elfriede Howard (left), a suburban homeowner, pays a flat fee of $276 for trash service at her $109,284 home on Kirk Place, which amounts to about 44 percent of her total tax bill. Her next-door neighbor, Charleen Tinley, lives in the urban tax district, where trash service is funded through property taxes and an $81 fee. Mrs. Tinley pays about $130 for the same trash service at her $102,230 home - about 12 percent of her total tax bill. An urban homeowner in a house worth $308,000 would pay the same $276 for trash service that a suburban dweller pays.  Nate Owens/Staff
Nate Owens/Staff
Residents of Augusta's urban and suburban tax districts pay for their city trash service in two ways. Elfriede Howard (left), a suburban homeowner, pays a flat fee of $276 for trash service at her $109,284 home on Kirk Place, which amounts to about 44 percent of her total tax bill. Her next-door neighbor, Charleen Tinley, lives in the urban tax district, where trash service is funded through property taxes and an $81 fee. Mrs. Tinley pays about $130 for the same trash service at her $102,230 home - about 12 percent of her total tax bill. An urban homeowner in a house worth $308,000 would pay the same $276 for trash service that a suburban dweller pays.

Trucks come by their house on Kirk Place twice each week for household garbage, yard waste and recycling. The service costs them $276 per year.

Their next-door neighbor, Charleen Tinley, pays less than half of that. Their houses have about the same value. The same trucks pick up their trash, but Mrs. Tinley pays only about $130 per year.

That's because what you pay for trash service in Augusta depends on where you live. Mrs. Tinley's house sits just inside the old city limits. The Howards' house is on the other side of the line. Those few feet of distance makes a $146 difference to Mrs. Tinley.

She is not alone.

An analysis of property tax bills by The Augusta Chronicle has determined that more than 90 percent of urban homeowners pay less than the $276 fee charged in the suburbs. About 70 percent pay less than half of that.

On the other hand, there are some who pay more. At least 5 percent of urban home-owners pay more than $276, and some pay double or even triple that amount. At least nine homeowners pay more than $1,000 per year for city trash service.

The reason behind the inequity is the dual system Augusta uses to charge property owners for trash service. Some pay a flat fee, while others pay a combination of tax and fees that results in situations such as the one on Kirk Place.

It might not sound fair, but that's how the system works. So far, city officials have been unable or unwilling to fix it.

"That's absurd," Commissioner Joe Bowles said when he heard about the difference between the Kirk Place trash bills, both of which originate from his district.

"The whole thing is confusing," he said. "We need to figure out a way to charge everyone the same amount."

Mr. Bowles says that instead of billing everyone separately, all property owners should pay the same flat fee, added to their taxes as it is now in the suburban area.

His suggestion, however, is just one idea among many on how to address Augusta's trash service problem.

Some want the trash fee off the tax bill altogether. Others have suggested they get rid of flat fees and pay for the trash service with a higher mill rate countywide. Others think adding the fee to residential water bills would be an equitable solution.

Augusta's Solid Waste Director Mark Johnson has proposed another idea. He wants to bill property owners who receive the trash service separately - another user fee. Mr. Johnson's proposal, however, stalled at the Dec. 19 commission meeting.

Commissioner Andy Cheek argued in favor of approving the separate billing system, but he was opposed by Commissioner Jerry Brigham and then-Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams.

"There is no perfect plan," Mr. Cheek said. "We've kicked it around for over two years ..."

After much discussion, commissioners once again failed to make any progress. Motions to keep the current system and to implement the new proposal both failed.

Mr. Johnson said it was unlikely that his department would bring the issue back to the commission any time soon.

"It cost me the same to pick up garbage, no matter who you are or where you live," Mr. Johnson said. "Ultimately, there would have to be policy that is uniform city-wide."

How this happened

The problem had its genesis more than a decade ago in the consolidation of Augusta and Richmond County.

When the two governments planned their merger, officials had to devise a plan that would take into account the differing services and financial obligations of each entity.

In general, Augusta city residents had more services, such as street lights, trash pickup and better fire protection.

There were also debts, such as the 1945 pension plan and outstanding general obligation bonds that would need to be repaid.

To pay for all of that, Augusta property owners had a separate tax rate in addition to their county taxes.

The urban services tax district was created, which basically followed the lines of the Augusta city limits.

Property owners within that area would be required to pay an additional tax rate on top of the county rate paid by all property owners in consolidated Augusta-Richmond County.

But over the years the difference between the services received by residents of the two districts has become less significant, and some debts, such as the old revenue bonds, have been paid off for years.

Today, many suburban residents, especially those in west Augusta, don't see any real difference in their city services than those of urban residents.

Trash service, street lights, and police and fire protection are basically the same in the suburbs and the city.

For example, Augusta-Richmond County Fire Chief Howard Willis said since the department has realigned fire stations in the past few years, fire protection for most of the county has improved.

Except for rural areas in the distant southern portions of the county, such as McBean, Chief Willis said fire protection is basically uniform.

Although insurance ratings vary widely between the old city and county, Chief Willis said those ratings are based on 20-year-old information. He expects Augusta to receive a single countywide rating next year when inspectors return to audit the service.

More service in the suburbs, however, hasn't meant equality for suburban residents.

Ironically, when Augusta officials decided to extend trash service into the suburbs, the way they decided to pay for it created real inequities for Augusta's property owners.

Tax and fees

In 2001, the Augusta Commission voted to give trash service to suburban residents. City residents were already paying for the service through the Urban Services tax rate.

But instead of increasing the tax rate in the county, officials chose to add a $195 flat fee to the property tax bills of suburban dwellers. Why?

The reason is the tax cap, city officials say.

In 1979, a law was passed limiting the millage officials could charge in Richmond County, based on a complex formula. The cap changes every year and is calculated with an equation based on the 1979 millage and changes in the tax digest. This gives officials the maximum tax rate they can charge by law.

So, increasing the taxes for suburban residents could create problems in keeping the tax rate under the cap.

A flat fee, however, doesn't have that problem, and when the cost of service increases, the rate can be increased without worrying about the tax cap. Or so city officials thought.

But after the suburban trash fee was set at $195, officials were reluctant to raise it, even though the cost for trash service was increasing. That went on for years until 2005, when the fund was more than $4 million in the hole, according to Mr. Johnson.

After much discussion, commissioners agreed to raise rates by $81 - to $276 for suburban residents.

But instead of charging urban dwellers the same $276 fee, as was suggested, commissioners opted to continue funding the trash service through the Urban Services tax rate, and to tack on an $81 fee.

The effect was that for the first time, many urban property owners would at least pay something for their trash service. Despite the change, the vast majority of urban property owners still pay less than their suburban counterparts.

The Chronicle's analysis of tax bills determined that an urban homeowner would have to own a property with a fair market value of at least $308,000 in order to pay the same $276 trash fee that every suburban trash customer pays.

Adding the $81 fee to tax bills of urban customers also presented challenges. The biggest problem, which continues today, is billing people accurately.

Officials had difficulty matching the customer list from garbage contractors to the property tax system, which uses parcel numbers to identify each property.

"What we did is if (the property) was coded residential, we turned it on," Mr. Johnson said, meaning that the property owner was billed for trash service.

The problem with that strategy is that many residential properties are vacant and some belong to nonprofit organizations, which are tax exempt or don't get the service.

The result is that in the past two years, the tax commissioner's office has issued more than 2,000 refunds for improperly billed trash fees.

For example, one of those billed improperly for service is the Ramada Plaza Hotel on Broad Street. The hotel pays about $2,300 in taxes per year to subsidize residential trash pickup - including the $81 fee - and it doesn't even get the service.

"That's kinda crazy," Ramada owner Bonnie Ruben said after learning about her trash bill. "I think it is definitely an inequity and very unfair."

Fair or not, because it is funded in part by urban taxes, most downtown businesses subsidize the trash service while businesses in the suburbs do not.

Another repercussion from increasing fees is that it affects the escrow accounts and house payments of individual homeowners, according to Chief Deputy Tax Commissioner North Williamson.

Mr. Williamson recently told commissioners that some banks have balked at paying the increased fees because they didn't consider them a tax. He said any future increases in trash fees would create similar troubles.

Mr. Williamson said his office would prefer to have the charge off the tax bills.

Commissioner Jerry Brigham said whatever the solution, one must be found and soon.

Even though his constituents prefer leaving the trash fee on tax bills, the current situation leaves Augusta vulnerable to litigation from an angry taxpayer, he said.

"It's just a matter of time before somebody sues us," Mr. Brigham said.

The solution

Augusta's Solid Waste Director has asked the commissioners to approve the purchase of a software package that would include a customer billing system for trash service.

So far, the votes have not emerged to approve that, nor the switch from the current tax and fee system to a separate trash bill.

Commissioner Marion Williams is still opposed to the separate trash bill.

"I don't see how having a separate billing system is any better than what we've got," he said.

Mr. Williams says he's concerned that Augusta will lose its leverage in collecting payments if the charges come off of property tax bills.

Currently, if a property owner doesn't pay his taxes - which include trash fees - the city can place a lien on the property and ultimately take it if the bill isn't paid.

Mr. Johnson concedes there might be some collection problems with a new bill, but he thinks those can be overcome. Of the solutions available, a separate trash bill is the one he would recommend.

"That's the most accurate system for me," Mr. Johnson said. "If we didn't have a tax cap I might have a different recommendation."

Some residents, such as those on Kirk Place, agree the system isn't fair.

"No question about that," Mr. Howard said, but he's not happy with Mr. Johnson's proposal, either.

He'd prefer to keep the trash bill on his taxes, so he can use it as a deduction on his federal income tax.

"If they put it out as a fee, I can't do that," Mr. Howard said.

Commissioners will have a tough time making everyone happy.

Mr. Williams says a separate bill might ensure that those who receive service pay the same amount, but he says that's still not fair.

What would be fair is a system in which every property owner paid a share - including those who don't get city trash service, Mr. Williams said.

Owners of businesses, empty buildings and vacant lots benefit from trash service, he said. A flat fee on every property tax bill would pay for curb-side trash pickup, and also for cleaning up illegal dumping in vacant lots and abandoned buildings.

It would include the overall cleanliness of Augusta, he said.

"It's got to be on every property tax (bill)," Mr. Williams said. "It think it's got to be a fair system all the way across."

Staff writer Sylvia Cooper contributed to this article.

STAFF RESEARCH: HOW IT WORKS

Augusta might be one consolidated city, but it has two systems for funding its services.

It depends on where you live - or really where you own property.

There are four tax districts in Richmond County. Two are for the cities of Hephzibah and Blythe. The two remaining tax districts are for Augusta residents.

The first Augusta tax district is the urban services district - basically the area covered by the former Augusta city limits. The second is the suburban district - basically the area outside the old city limits, what was known before consolidation as Richmond County.

Each district has a different set of millage rates and fees which determine the total tax bill for an individual property.

All property owners pay:

STATE TAX: Small portion of property tax which goes to the state

SCHOOL TAX: Supports the county school system

COUNTY TAX: Supports the city's general fund

CAPITAL OUTLAY TAX: Used to purchase equipment and other nonreoccurring expenses

Urban district property owners also pay:

URBAN TAX: Funds law enforcement, fire protection, street lights, trash service and other things in the old city area

CITY TRASH FEE: Flat $81 fee that pays for a portion of city trash service

Suburban district property owners also pay:

FIRE PROTECTION TAX: Funds suburban fire service

CITY TRASH FEE: A flat $276 to property owners with city trash service

STREET LIGHTS FEE: Fee based on $45 per 100 feet of street frontage

The effect of the tax system is that properties with the same value in different districts have much different tax bills. The reason is the property tax bill mixes tax rates, which are dependant on the value of the property, with fees, which are not. The biggest problems are associated with the way the city funds trash service.

PROBLEMS

IT'S INEQUITABLE. People pay different rates for the same service, depending on where they live and how much their house is worth. More than 90 percent of urban property owners pay less than their suburban counterparts.

IT'S UNFAIR. All property owners in the urban district subsidize trash service (whether they have the service or not). In the suburban area, only users pay, and they pay proportionally based on the number of cans.

IT'S ERROR PRONE. The tax commissioner's office issued more than 2,000 refunds in the past two years to property owners mistakenly billed for trash service.

IT'S UNDERFUNDED. The service fund was $4 million in the red by 2005, primarily because of years without a rate increase.

CASH FLOW IS SLOW. Because trash service is funded through property taxes paid at the end of the year, most of the year the service operates through loans from the city's General Fund.

ESCROW PROBLEMS. When officials added new trash fees to tax bills it created havoc with escrow accounts and caused increases to monthly house payments. Some banks balked at paying the fees at all. Any future fee increases could have similar effects.

SOLUTIONS

NEW BILL. Solid Waste Director Mark Johnson wants to disentangle the trash fee from property tax bills and bill each user separately, much like water service.

ADVANTAGES: It's fair. Everyone who receives the service would pay for it and those who don't get it would not. That is not the case now. Mr. Johnson said it would be easier to respond to the needs of individual customers if they were in a separate computer system. Cash flow would improve because users would be billed monthly or quarterly.

DISADVANTAGES: Some expect collection rates for the service would go down. Also, removing it from property tax bills would mean property owners could no longer use the charge as a deduction on state and federal income taxes. Users who currently pay little in property tax would be hit with sticker shock.

WATER BILL. Some have suggested adding the trash fees to monthly water bills of utilities customers and removing it from tax bills.

ADVANTAGES: The utilities department already has billing software and a good collection rate, so the government could expect cash flow to improve. Users would be billed monthly.

DISADVANTAGES: Many people who have trash service don't have city water, so adding them to the billing system and collecting from those customers could be a problem. Also, the Utilities Department has millions in outstanding revenue bonds, the rates of which might be affected by adding more customers and more collections problems. Also, the payment burden would be transferred from property owners to residents who are less likely to pay.

TRASH TAX. Officials could keep the service on the tax bills but do away with the flat fee. Instead, it would be funded through a countywide mill rate.

ADVANTAGES: It would ensure there was enough funding to pay for the service and get its books back into the black. The tax would be simple to collect and would be deductible on individual income tax returns.

DISADVANTAGES: Every property owner would pay whether they have trash service or not. Cash flow delays would still be a problem. Tax rates would have to increase with costs, but officials have been reluctant to increase rates in the past. Also, because Augusta has a property tax cap, increasing rates in the future could present a problem if the tax digest doesn't grow proportionally.

FLAT FEE. A $276 flat fee would be on the property tax bill of every property owner with trash service. Also, the urban services millage rate might be reduced to offset the increase.

ADVANTAGES: Everyone with the service would pay the same rate. The fee should still be deductible on income tax returns.

DISADVANTAGES: Fee increases would affect house payments of homeowners and could cause escrow account problems. Also, officials would have to work the kinks out of the system to reduce the number of refunds for inaccurate billing. Cash flow delays would remain a problem for solid waste.

Comments (11) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
disgustedwithaugusta
0
Points
disgustedwithaugusta 01/07/07 - 07:30 am
0
0
this is insane -- there has

this is insane -- there has to be something tax payers can do to fix this problem. i say we start with the county commisioners.

fd1962
26
Points
fd1962 01/07/07 - 11:19 am
0
0
You mean this wasn't a topic
Unpublished

You mean this wasn't a topic covered in Haiwaii or Las Vegas?

MyOpinion2
5
Points
MyOpinion2 01/07/07 - 12:40 pm
0
0
It is no wonder that the city

It is no wonder that the city of Augusta is divided in every aspect and cannot come together, even the billing is done separately for each district. I say the city of Augusta needs to act as ONE AREA. Augusta is Augusta no matter where you live in the surrounding areas. Perhaps if the city is unified in billing/area it will not take so much effort for our commissioners in trying to appease everyone with their decision making process.. Treat everyone the same for Pete's sake!

iyanaa
0
Points
iyanaa 01/07/07 - 01:01 pm
0
0
Stop cheating the people of

Stop cheating the people of Augusta. Augusta is Augusta no matter where we live. Get a damn system and charge the same price for the same service. Commissioners need to get their head out of thier A--. It's not that hard people. MAke a decision and stop cheating us. You want to know why people are leaving this area.......

fd1962
26
Points
fd1962 01/07/07 - 01:30 pm
0
0
What point do the Reader's
Unpublished

What point do the Reader's Comments serve besides window dressing to make it SEEM that the Chronicle cares about its readership?
What a joke. Censorship and total rejection of submissions are routine. I have seen comments removed AFTER having been posted for hours. Your Censor-In-Chief should at least get on the job early.

WW1949
19
Points
WW1949 01/07/07 - 01:44 pm
0
0
Why is trash service any

Why is trash service any different than fire, police or school services. Every property owner now pays a school tax even if they do not have children. I think all county services shouldbe spread across all taxpayers at the same rate. I pay $2300.00 per year in school taxes with no children and I don't think that is fair but that is the way the system is-all costs spread across all taxpayers.

MyOpinion2
5
Points
MyOpinion2 01/07/07 - 01:47 pm
0
0
Good point bjonesIII!

Good point bjonesIII!

doubt_it
3
Points
doubt_it 01/07/07 - 03:35 pm
0
0
Solution: Georgia Municipal

Solution: Georgia Municipal Association. There are people out there who have dealth with these problems before. Why does Augusta feel the need to reinvent the wheel?

behonest1
2
Points
behonest1 01/07/07 - 04:31 pm
0
0
I wrote a letter to the Mayor

I wrote a letter to the Mayor & my Commissioner concerning this. It is interesting that Mr. Bringham mentioned that someone will be sueing the city over this. First a two person household does not need the same services as a six person household and therefore should not pay the same rates. Secondly, I don't see how anyone can write off a trash bill simply because it is billed to then on their escrow account. It is still a trash collection not a tax collection. I also don't understand how the county gets away with billing it on tax bills, most homeowners pay a mortgage escrow based on taxes, and insurance, trash collection is neither, and residents should refuse to pay for this collection throught the mortage company, as it was never agreeded to when the house was mortgaged, & there is no legal right for the county to do this. If the city wants to be in the trash service they should offer levels of service based on what the resident needs not what is thrown at them. I never fill my can once a week yet I am paying for two pickups a week. I have never use bulk service but pay for it year round, why not charge a fee only upon use of a service. Tax payers are being cheated as usual.

Harrisburg Homeowner
0
Points
Harrisburg Homeowner 01/07/07 - 07:14 pm
0
0
From what I see, there is no

From what I see, there is no solution offered currently that would satisfy everyone. Instead of complaining about this, how about each of us contact other cities and finding out how they manage this situation? Perhaps if we became more proactive in our city government, we can help straighten out the bumps. Let's gather written solutions, listing them as they were done in this article, and submit them to our city government. Surely if we each contact a separate city ourselves, we can find a solution that would be equitable for all. If we did this ourselves, we perhaps would also prevent them from having to organize a costly study committee.

behonest1
2
Points
behonest1 01/07/07 - 11:57 pm
0
0
themctier, Good point. so

themctier,
Good point. so let me say Killeen Texas... $13.50 a month, included one trash pickup a week, included yard waste once a week, call in for bulk waste no extra charge.Recycling was an extra cost if the if the service was requested.And you could take 200 lbs to dump per month free of charge. Monthly billed by city with water utilities.
In Fayetteville NC it depends on the carrier. however I paid $11.00 a month. Included 10 bags yard waste a week. Bulk waste at $10.00 a pickup as needed. Could make trips to dump at no extra charge.Monthly bill by the trash company of your choice.
Both are large military towns, both rates indicated are within the last three years. Both were fair prices and nothing was jamed down a customers throat. Augusta charges unreasonable prices, and for services most customers don't want or can't use. I don't even fill one can in a two week period, yet I am forced to pay for something I don't need. My neighbor has his house rented off and on, in the last year his house was rented for 7 months, it remains empty. Should he be paying for trash service on his tax bill. No! it is wrong and he should not pay for a year when he didn't need the service.

behonest1
2
Points
behonest1 01/08/07 - 12:22 am
0
0
One last Comment, Mr. Bowles

One last Comment, Mr. Bowles and Mr. Williams you are unreasonable to think that residents should all pay the same fee. Mr. Williams You even want residents to pay if they don't use the service this is just plain wrong. You tried to cram a drag strip down the throats of residents, and now you want to charge every one the same price for services even if they do not need them or want them. Are you going to try to charge all the residents a flat fee for water, even when it is turned off? Of course not so why should trash service be any different? I think the city would lose the fight if a tax payer refused to pay for service thought the tax bill, yea you could place a lean on the property but I doubt the city would win in a court of law. I really wish the Commissioners would actually do something that made sense, perhaps this is just asking to much. It's too bad the commissioners won't take Mr. Johnson advise and do what is right.

corgimom
31079
Points
corgimom 08/01/10 - 10:49 pm
0
0
The only time we fill a can

The only time we fill a can is at Christmas. We have used bulk pickup once in 7 years.

But I don't mind paying for more than that. I would rather pay a little more than have trash sit around. Trash pickup is a bargain for what you get in return. It's a necessary service for the good of all, and critical to public health- unless you enjoy having rats.

rebellious
20623
Points
rebellious 08/03/12 - 12:11 pm
0
0
Thanks to Steve Crawford

From AC 2007, so some inequities may have been rectified.

Urban district property owners also pay:

URBAN TAX: Funds law enforcement, fire protection, street lights, trash service and other things in the old city area

CITY TRASH FEE: Flat $81 fee that pays for a portion of city trash service

Suburban district property owners also pay:

FIRE PROTECTION TAX: Funds suburban fire service

CITY TRASH FEE: A flat $276 to property owners with city trash service

STREET LIGHTS FEE: Fee based on $45 per 100 feet of street frontage

The effect of the tax system is that properties with the same value in different districts have much different tax bills. The reason is the property tax bill mixes tax rates, which are dependant on the value of the property, with fees, which are not. The biggest problems are associated with the way the city funds trash service.

PROBLEMS

IT'S INEQUITABLE. People pay different rates for the same service, depending on where they live and how much their house is worth. More than 90 percent of urban property owners pay less than their suburban counterparts.

IT'S UNFAIR. All property owners in the urban district subsidize trash service (whether they have the service or not). In the suburban area, only users pay, and they pay proportionally based on the number of cans.

IT'S ERROR PRONE. The tax commissioner's office issued more than 2,000 refunds in the past two years to property owners mistakenly billed for trash service.

IT'S UNDERFUNDED. The service fund was $4 million in the red by 2005, primarily because of years without a rate increase.

CASH FLOW IS SLOW. Because trash service is funded through property taxes paid at the end of the year, most of the year the service operates through loans from the city's General Fund.

ESCROW PROBLEMS. When officials added new trash fees to tax bills it created havoc with escrow accounts and caused increases to monthly house payments. Some banks balked at paying the fees at all. Any future fee increases could have similar effects.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs