Batesvilel Budget Hearing

Published 12:00 am Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Yawner budget hearing caps dramatic meetings

By Billy Davis

The Panola County Board of Supervisors breezed through a five-minute budget hearing Monday, which was made even speedier when a call for public comments went unheeded.

Supervisors unanimously passed the 2011-2012 budget, then passed the tax levy for the same fiscal year, in two separate votes.

Sign up for our daily email newsletter

Get the latest news sent to your inbox

The board was approving the budget and tax levy to meet a state deadline of September 15. The fiscal year begins October 1.

Panola County government has limped through three years of recessions that have seen revenues plummet. The economic woes were worsened by years of overspending by the previous Board of Supervisors, and previous county administrator, that put county government perilously in the red.

The current Board of Supervisors sat through four budget meetings during August— some of them testy and tense — to plan a 2011-2012 budget. At the final budget meeting, Board President Gary Thompson announced expenditures are expected to exceed revenues by $207,000 in the coming year.  

After that meeting, County Administrator Kelley Magee further explained that Panola County government is expected to finish 2012 with a half-million dollar deficit.

At the Monday budget hearing, Magee used pie charts to describe “Sources of Revenue” for county government and where expenditures are allocated.

2012 tax levies

The 2012 budget does not include a tax increase by the Board of Supervisors, though North Panola Schools requested a four-mill increase for its new fiscal year.

North Panola is capped at 55 mills, though two bonds push the total to 63.27, up from 59.62 this year.
South Panola Schools will remained unchanged in 2012, at 58.73 mills, after the school district increased 2.48 mills for the current fiscal year.

Millage increases by Panola County’s public school districts are a long-standing issue for public bodies, since supervisors must allow increases that fall within state guidelines. The school district, meanwhile, can point out that is didn’t raise millage rates  — only requested an increase.