Commissioners approved a tax rate of .5362 cents per $100 valuation during the meeting, which includes a 5-cent hike to cover lost tax revenue from the ongoing suit between the petrochemical company and the appraisal district, which is responsible for determining the appraised value of the Big Spring Refinery.

According to Commissioner Bill Crooker, the tax suit — which now covers taxable values for 2006 through 2008 — and subsequent shortfall caused by the dispute is unfortunate.

“It's unfortunate Alon has taken the position they have taken,” said Crooker. “This is causing us to raise our tax rate, and there's no way for us to get around it.”

In 2007 Alon paid taxes on an undisputed valuation — approximately $80 million, which was reduced to just over $50 million after abatements were applied — which generated $225,000 in taxes for the county. According to County Judge Mark Barr, they expect the Israeli-based company to pay approximately the same amount until the matter is resolved.

“A nickel of that is from Alon,” said Barr firmly. “If we hadn't had the situation with Alon, we wouldn't have had to go above the rollback rate. However, because of it we've had to go over it by about a nickel. That's what it amounts to.”

The Israeli-based company's most recent suit alleges the district's 2008 valuation of the Big Spring Refinery — $275 million — is over-inflated, the same argument it has placed on the valuations from 2006 and 2007. The suit regarding 2008 valuations will be the third in a row from Alon concerning valuations

Robert H. Moore III, 118th District Court judge, recently ruled the 2007 market value of the refinery, as of Jan. 1, 2007, was $218 million, falling between the appraisal district's valuation of $320 million and Alon's claims of $152 million. However, since that ruling, the court has encouraged both sides to reach a settlement on other allegations.

According to County Appraiser Brett McKibben, Alon USA and representatives of the appraisal district are expected to enter into negotiations sometime in the next few weeks, but even if a compromise can be reached, Barr said its unclear when the county will see any tax money.

“I don't have any idea,” said Barr. “They are in negotiations, and they may negotiate some kind of payment schedule. Who knows. We don't know anything about that.”

Also during the meeting, commissioners held a public meeting regarding the 2008-2009 budget, which came in at $23.4 million, including $11.57 million for the construction of the new county jail. The hearing drew no comments from the audience or commissioners.

According to Barr, the completion of the county's annual budgetary process was bitter sweet.

“As far as the budget is concerned, yes, I'm happy with it,” said Barr. “Am I happy with the tax rate? No. I would have liked to seen it much lower.”

Both the budget and tax rate were approved on a unanimous vote from the court.

Contact Staff Writer Thomas Jenkins at 263-7331 ext. 232 or by e-mail at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it