The Hanover County Board of Supervisors has instructed the Finance Committee to examine the effect of moving the due date for second half real estate taxes from Oct. 5 to Dec. 5, a move that could cost the county more than $400,000.

It was announced during the supervisors’ regular meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 25, that the due date for the first-half real estate tax payment is June 5.

In 2008, the Board of Supervisors moved the due date for the second half tax payment from Dec. 5 to Oct. 5.

County Treasurer Scott Miller said the county could lose about $409,000 annually in investment earnings if the date is put back to Dec 5.

After Miller’s presentation concerning the financial considerations of the move, the supervisors decided they needed more time to evaluate the information before holding a public hearing on the possible change.

“We just received the information,” Henry District representative Sean Davis said. “I think the prudent thing would be to wait to make a decision.”

Miller said the county receives $49 million in real estate tax twice a year and that pushing the due date of the second half payment back to Dec. 5 could cost the county $159,000 per year in investment income.

If the county moved $15 million from long-term investments to short-term investments to make sure the county had enough money to pay bills, Miller said it could cost Hanover another $250,000 a year in investment income.

“I have never been a change for change’s sake person,” Angela Kelly-Wiecek, who represents the Chickahominy District, said. “I think it’s important when we consider matters that we consider the long-term consequences of these changes.”

In other business, county attorney Sterling E. Rives III presented a legislative update and David Maloney, acting planning director, held a workshop on updating the Comprehensive Plan.

One piece of legislation, House Bill 1242 concerning dangerous wild animals, was introduced by Del. Chris Peace, R-97.

The bill would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor to privately possess, sell, transfer or breed dangerous wild animals, which are identified by taxonomic classification.

The bill would grandfather in the ownership of any existing dangerous wild animals. However, the owner of such animals would be required to meet certain conditions in order to maintain possession of the animals.

The bill limits the possession of dangerous wild animals to certain types of entities and facilities.

The legislation sets out the procedures to be followed in the impoundment and forfeiture of dangerous wild animals.

The House of Delegates referred the bill to the Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources.

Rives said Senate Bill 549, which classifies certain machinery and tools as intangible personal property, would only be subject to state taxation if purchased on or after July 1, 2012, that have not been in service for more than three years.

The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Finance.

Since most of the depreciation of tools and machinery that are subject to taxation occurs in the first three years, Rives said there would be little value for which counties could tax after that.

Maloney said the Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 2007 and that it is reviewed, not necessarily revised, every five years.

One issue the planning commission staff will assess is suburban residential land use policies.

Maloney said that density questions as to whether an area can be developed with one to two houses or three to four houses frequently were an issue, depending on where the property is located.

“Builders will tell you that there are some areas where one to two houses per acre are not desirable because of the costs to put in water, sewer and other infrastructures,” Maloney said.

Beaverdam District supervisor Aubrey M. Stanley said there was property in some urban areas of the county that already had some infrastructure in place and could be developed.