‘No’ vote to extend parks tax would be ‘catastrophic,’ Henderson mayor says

City officials in Henderson have been trying to get the word out about a ballot question that will ask residents if they support the renewal of a tax that has helped fund the city’s parks for nearly three decades — and what their vote would mean.

If residents vote down the extension, city leaders say, the result could be steep cuts to Henderson’s parks, recreation programs and community services and the loss of a funding source that has generated more than $155 million in the past decade.

“It would be catastrophic,” Mayor Michelle Romero said, adding that it “can’t be understated how important this ballot initiative is to residents.”

Because the tax, which has been in place since 1997, is set to expire at the end of this year, the question of whether it should be extended will be on the June 9 primary election ballot. Early voting for the primary is May 23 through June 5.

The question was placed on the primary ballot, rather than the November general election ballot because asking voters to make a decision sooner would give more time to prepare for any changes brought by the vote, Romero said.

“The sooner we can get it settled and let people know and get them educated, the better,” Romero said.

City manages 77 parks

Romero added that while the city cannot officially take a stance on the ballot question, City Council members in their individual capacity can advocate for or against it.

“The city is just throwing the information out there. They’re not advocating, they’re not doing anything other than educating. The council members individually advocate for it.”

Rejection of the measure would force city officials to explore options such as across-the-board cuts to Parks and Recreation staffing, reduced operating hours at parks and recreation centers, fee increases or reductions in other city services, Henderson Assistant Finance Director David Weiser said at a City Council meeting in April.

According to the city’s website, Henderson manages 77 parks, eight recreation centers, 105 athletic fields and more than 300 miles of trails.

A “yes” vote on the proposed tax extension would cover about 40 percent of Henderson’s Parks and Recreation budget and would allow the city to continue funding the department at its current level, Romero said. If the vote fails, the city could lose up to $22 million in revenue annually that helps fund those amenities, Weiser said at the April 21 council meeting.

A one-member committee assembled by the Henderson City Council to argue in favor of the “no” vote — state law requires local governments approving ballot questions to assemble two committees, one for and one against — said in a digest explaining the ballot question that maintaining a tax levy for 30 years without reassessment could lead to stagnation in funding, “especially as costs rise due to inflation.”

In letters sent to the Las Vegas Review-Journal opinion section, former Mayor Debra March has also publicly supported the measure, while another reader called for the measure to be pulled from the ballot and replaced with a clearer explanation of the tax.

Romero, who is also up for re-election and will appear on the primary ballot, is not unique among Henderson mayoral contenders in her support for extending the tax. Each of the five candidates running for mayor has stated support for voting “yes” on the ballot question.

How will the vote impact Henderson’s property taxes?

Weiser said Thursday the city of Henderson’s residential property tax rate is currently $0.77 per $100 of assessed valuation. Of that, Weiser said, $0.12 per $100 of assessed valuation supports parks and recreation initiatives.

But Weiser added that Henderson residents pay an “overlapping” property tax rate — which includes taxes collected by Clark County and the state of Nevada — of $2.96 per $100 of assessed valuation.

Weiser said another element affecting property tax rates in Henderson is a Legislature-approved property tax cap that went into effect in 2005. That cap prevents residential property taxes from rising more than 3 percent a year, Weiser said.

Over the past several years, Weiser said, property value assessments in Nevada have generally outpaced rises in property taxes, which has effectively given homeowners a tax abatement, or discount. So while property taxes would remain at a similar rate for most Henderson residential property owners, Weiser said less of that revenue would be collected by the city and it would instead be redirected to Clark County.

“What effectively is changing is the amount of your tax discount,” Weiser said. “That abatement will simply shrink.”

While a “no” vote would lower a Henderson voter’s overlapping property tax rate to $2.84 per $100 of assessed valuation, Weiser said that most properties will not realize a tax decrease due to the abatements.

But Weiser said a “no” vote on the ballot question could lower tax rates for owners of newer properties. That’s because abatements are not yet available in the case of most newer properties since assessments on those properties have not outpaced the 3 percent cap on property tax increases.

Most homeowners, Weiser added, would see little to no change to their tax liability.

“The vast majority of properties in Henderson will not see a (tax) reduction,” Weiser said. “Most property owners do receive these tax discounts/abatements.”