Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-02-26
Rural Fairfax
Held Drain on
Funds
Urban Districts
Pay for Services,
Supervisors Told
D. NAf
By Mary Lou Werner

oy mary Lou werner
Real estate taxes from Fairfax
County's urban districts more
than pay for the costs of serv-
ices within these districts, but
the rural half of the county is
a financial liability. according to
findings Of Dr.. Homer Hoyt. an
economic expert.
DR.. Hoyt presented the final
portion of his economic base
survey of Fairfax County to the
Board of Supervisors and the
Planning Commission last night.
The comparative costs and
taxes in rural and urban areas
produced the most startling
single feature of his report.
Residents of the county's rura.
sections repeatedly have COM
planned they shouldered more
than their share of the tax
burden to buy services for the
rapid influx of urban jewellers.
According to DR.. Hoyt, their
complaint is without founda-
ton. He found that county ex-
penses borne by real estate taxes
in the three predominantly rural
magisterial districts in 1853
totaled $724, 489, of which $685.
831 went for schools. But real
estate tax receipts from the rural
districts were only $466,837.
Services in the three urban
districts cost S3,596,120 in 1858.
Real estate taxes from those
districts yielded S4.849,901. Thus
$253.143 surplus was enjoyed
by the county from the urban
districts.
Personal Property Excluded.
DR.. Hoyt's findings were based
on the six magisterial districts
that formerly existed. The county
subsequently has been divided
into seven maglsterial districts.
Personal property taxes were not
taken into account. Dr.. Hoyt
said assessors aren't able to give
true picture of the personal
property tax situation, therefore
he did not attempt to do so. The
county'S main source of income
is from real estate taxes.
Although the rural areas do
not pay their way according to
districts. DR.. Hoyt conceded that
individual taxpayers within the
rural districts might have the
heaviest tax bills. This is be-
| cause the total tax burden with
I in the rural areas is distributed
among fewer property owners.
Another factor is the lower value
of many homes within the rural
areas.
Departing from the district
by-district evaluation, DR.. Hoyt
compared the taX-prOduclng
trends of various types of resi-
dences.
He found that single family
home has to be worth $l4.500
in Fairfax County to pay its way
tax-wise. The 29.600 non-farm,
single-family homes pay 3097,-
995 in real estate taxes. Serv-
ices for those same homes cost
S3.618.68l This results in
S520,686 deficit TO provide s6rv-
ices to single-famlly. non-farm
homes.
S23.250 Revenue Deficit.
Taxes from farm lands and
buildings yield 1925 900. County
costs for these same properties
are $248,250. Therefore. tax
revenues from farms show
$23, $50 deficit
Income from apartment taxes
and commercial properties make
up the deficit brought by the
low-cost single-family homes and
the farms According 10 DR..
Hoyt. apartments pay S355.296
in taxes but cost the county only
$301.911 Commercial properties
pay $147,872 in taxes. They
incur no school costs at all.
Schools account for 1862 per
cent Of the total county oper-
ating costs. Therefore, taxes
from commercial properties yield
a surplus of S112.82l.
DR.. Hoyt urged the county
to concentrate on increasing
planned commercial centers
which Yields such a good tax
surplus.
IF the assessment of these
surplus producing types of prop
erty is not substantially increased
to cover the deficits of single
family homes" warned Dr.. Hoyt,
"the tax rate would increase
from the present $40 per S100
assessed value to 1894 by 1860.
even if county services remain
at the present level"
Even with the development OF
more shopping centers, Dr. Hoyt
cautioned that the county might
we'll expect a tax rate of So by
1860 as a result of rapidly in
creaSino school enrolment
Some Increase Unavoidable.
"Some increase IN the Fairfax
County tax rate as a result of
the increase in school member
ship cannot be avoided" said
DR. Hoyt. "but to hold this in
crease to moderate proportions,
it will be necessary to increase
commercial developments to a
market extent"
He said Fairfax County could
support one large regional shop
ping center right now. and pos
Sibly a second big one in 1870.
The supervisors recently rezoned
about 80 acres at Seven Corners
for a regional shopping center.
but thf developers are having
trouble getting access privileges
to Arlington boulevard.
BY promoting larger COM
mercial developments. DR.. Hoyt
figures Fairfax County can re-
cover some of the $l06 million