;

‘Have to pay the piper:’ Caroline Board of Supervisors adopt 6-cent real estate tax rate increase

by | Apr 15, 2026 | ALLFFP, Caroline, Government

When Bonnie Cannon and her husband, Clyde, retired 15 years ago, they had no idea of the economic strain they’d find themselves facing today.

The Bowling Green couple, like many in the rural county, are taken aback by the increased cost of daily necessities.

That was the message from Bonnie Cannon as she spoke to the Caroline County Board of Supervisors during a public hearing Tuesday night, pleading for it not to raise the real estate tax rate from 52 cents per $100 of assessed value to 58 cents — an 11.5% increase.

“I’ve never lived like this in my life before,” Bonnie Cannon said. “I grew up in Caroline County, born and raised here. I’ve never seen anything like it. With the huge reassessment that occurred last year, y’all raised the tax rate 2 cents above the equalized rate … So, and I say this in capital letters, how, how, how, can you even consider raising the tax rate again with the current state of our economy?”

The supervisors did more than consider the tax increase. They voted 4-2 to adopt the advertised tax rate of 58 cents. Mattaponi District Supervisor Floyd Thomas and Reginald Underwood of the Reedy Church District did not support the increase. The pair also voted against advertising the increase during a meeting last month.

County resident Mary Hodge joined Bonnie Cannon in speaking out against the increase, homing in on the fact that the tax increase will mostly pay for raises for county employees, particularly public safety personnel.

“I know the board is going to do what you want,” Hodge said. “I understand there are county employees most certainly deserving of raises, especially in this expensive economy. However, in my opinion, those raises should come from your budgetary process and not relying on we, the citizens, to fund them.”

Sheriff Scott Moser’s presentation to the board before the tax rate vote took place explained that his office is 15 deputies short based on the call volume in the past year. Moser proposed that the county increases starting pay for deputies to $58,125, a gain of $5,000 per year. That would still leave the county 13th out of 16 nearby localities, but nearly within $5,000 annually of third-place Stafford ($63,340).

Moser requested three new deputies. His office currently has 59 employees but needs 74 based on the 66,443 calls for assistance in the past year. By comparison, Stafford, which has five times the population of Caroline, only had 89,788 calls.

Moser said that with 1,126 calls per staff member, the Caroline Sheriff’s Office is understaffed and overworked. The recommended rate is 600 to 800 calls per year for one individual.

“Nine hundred calls per officer is considered overburdened and significantly increases the risk of fatigue, reduced effectiveness, and burnout,” Moser said.

When the supervisors voted on the advertised rate, it was noted that the first three cents of the tax increase will go toward public-safety personnel and the next penny would cover raises for other county staff.

Underwood said residents now “have to pay the piper” after years of the county neglecting public safety. He also bemoaned having to match state funds for the county’s public school system, which contributes to the increase, as well. He complained that positions funded by one-time grants were eventually added to the school’s operational budget.

“Nobody wants to make the tough decisions, but that’s why we’re sitting here — to call a ball a ball and a strike a strike,” Underwood said. “Those 24 positions or the money for those grant positions could’ve been used for teacher pay raises and not come out of the general budget.”

County officials are hopeful that eventually, tax revenue from data center development will help with the annual budget.

But any major increases from that industry are at least two years away.

The applicant for one project, a phased data center campus on 95 acres in the Carmel Church area, withdrew their application just prior to Tuesday’s meeting. The project would have been located one-half mile east of Colemans Mill Road along W.C. Spratt Drive.

Share This