Purcellville gets a break: no vehicle license fee for 2025

At the Feb. 13 Purcellville Town Council meeting, the Council voted 7-0 to accept a one year grant from the County which would allow the Town to eliminate the $25 vehicle license fee for 2025. The Council will reassess options next year. 

For the 2025 vehicle license fee, council was presented information at the Jan. 14 meeting regarding the County’s position to eliminate the license fee for 2025, with the County offering a one-time grant program to the towns to offset the current FY25 budget impact.

The Council discussed either adopting the $25 vehicle fee as budgeted, or adopt a vehicle license fee of zero—with the County paying the Town $181,000 in a grant to offset the impact of eliminating the revenue loss for FY25.

Staff said it was important to note that it would be better to make a decision at the meeting because it had to be adopted or declined prior to the Feb. 28 deadline.

Council Member Carol Luke made a motion to adopt the zero-dollar rate and she was interrupted by Council Member Kevin Wright who said the council rules would have to be suspended.

Mayor Chris Bertaut said a suspension of the rules was not necessary because it was not a public hearing and the Council was only having a discussion with a possible action.

Wright then said, “We don’t vote on the item the first time we see it. It’s a discussion, correct?”

Bertaut reminded him that “staff is mentioning that they are recommending that we vote on it tonight.”

Speaking over Bertaut who was finishing his sentence, Wright said, “I’m not saying we don’t vote on it. I’m just saying we do it correctly—and first of all this is a discussion, and we can decide if we want to vote on it tonight.”

Luke said the grant was a revenue offset to the town of $181,000. At this point Luke’s motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Ben Nett.

Council Member Erin Rayner asked Assistant Director of Finance Connie LeMarr, “If we get rid of $181,000 of revenue to the Town, we get one year bridge that next year we are out almost $200 grand on top of everything else they [the council majority] have moved out of the general fund?

“It’s gone, so we have to fill that void. Okay, so we realize the next year ‘Oh, we realize we should have not gotten rid of that—we need that $181,000 back.’ What is the process to go through to reinstate that $25 tax?”

LeMarr said the Town is not actually eliminating the fee, “that’s why we are setting the rate at zero. We are not removing the fee entirely.” LeMarr said, “Next year we would present you the option to reinstate the fee at $25.”

“Or,” said Rayner, “we would have to raise our taxes again to make up for that hole, correct?” “Correct,” said LeMarr.

Wright said that time is “not on our side with this.”

Council Member Caleb Stought said he was torn on this, “I really am.” He said he was encouraged that staff said “it’s fairly benign to bring it back. I think I could go either way here.”

Council Member Susan Khalil said, “I am not exactly sure why we are mountain climbing this little mole hill. I think we should graciously accept this money from the County and let our residents know that we are graciously accepting this money from the County—that it may not last—be very clear with our residents.

“To not accept this money would really be looking a gift horse in the mouth. It would be my hope that we would not have to reinstate it—that we could find other sources of income to make up for it.”

Khalil concluded, “I don’t know what would preclude us from going back to the County,” and hopefully they will continue to have this excess cash.

Nett said it sounded like the Council had a consensus and he supported the elimination of the $25 vehicle license fee.

Luke said, “It’s like a gift. We could say this year you won’t have to pay the $25, there are no promises for next year. Hopefully we won’t have to reinstate it.”

Bertaut said he agreed that “we should have a break this year. I’d also like to point out that this is not an either-or proposition—this year we are going to set it at zero dollars.” He said if the County can’t be convinced to continue “their largess—we may none the less have some savings and be able to set it at a smaller rate. “There’s really no downside to this,” said Bertaut.