[Vision2020] Today's Daily News Editorial: "Tax relief must start at home in Moscow"

[Mark Solomon]

Saundra,

I too am frustrated at the seemingly unstoppable rise in property 
taxes but am very reluctant to draw the line at the city of Moscow 
budget. As has been eloquently pointed out by the posting from Sen. 
Werk, the Republican dominated legislature has been steadily shifting 
the property tax burden from business to homeowners. As Rep. Trail 
highlights, that same Republican shifting has occurred on the sales 
tax through the many exemptions granted by the Legislature. As I 
tried to pound home when I ran for the Legislature two years ago, the 
same shift was blessed by the GOP when they embraced then Gov. 
Kempthorne's income tax cut that lowered the corporate tax rate at a 
greater ratio than the individual taxpayer.

The Legislature is in Boise, far away from Moscow and seemingly 
uncaring about anything other than continuing GOP domination of Idaho 
government. This from the party that as their tax policy darling 
Grover Norquist says would like to trim down government so it will 
fit in a bathtub. By pitting taxpayers against local government (the 
only place they have a direct say in their taxes) they successfully 
achieve their goal of stripping government of the ability to offer a 
countervailing force to the "me first/no regulation" attitude of most 
big business.

By the way, the City makes up about 25-30% of the Moscow taxpayer's 
annual property tax bill so raising the city levy 3% is less than a 
1% increase to the taxpayer. The rest of your tax bill goes to the 
Moscow School District, bond levies approved by the voters (as in the 
city pool), the county, library, highway district and the Moscow 
cemetery.

Local government must still be responsible for explaining why 
increases are needed and must still weigh the ability of the 
community to support those taxes both economically and politically. 
But they are not playing with a full deck... the Legislature is 
holding all the aces.

Mark

At 4:45 PM -0700 7/24/06, Saundra Lund wrote:
>Visionaries:
>
>It seems like it's not too often I find myself agreeing with the
>Moscow-Pullman Daily News editorial board anymore, but I think today's
>editorial makes some valid points.
>
>Without getting into the merits of the specific proposals (some of which I
>agree with, some of which I disagree with) that apparently necessitate such
>an increase, I am absolutely disappointed and angry that for the third year
>in a row, Moscow property owners are looking at a 3% property tax increase.
>I am very blessed to live in a solidly middle-class family, but such an
>increase won't be easy for us and will likely influence our
>ability/willingness to support future public school bond levies or requests
>for funding for other community needs.
>
>For those interested, please scroll below my signature to read the
>editorial.
>
>
>Saundra Lund
>Moscow, ID
>
>The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
>nothing.
>- Edmund Burke
>
>***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2006, Saundra Lund.
>Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
>without the express written permission of the author.*****
>
>
>"OUR VIEW: Tax relief must start at home in Moscow
>
>By Steve McClure, for the editorial board
>Published: 07-24-2006
>
>Dirk Kempthorne rattled a few cages when he announced in January that
>property tax relief was a local issue. In his State of the State address,
>Idaho's then-governor appeared to be passing the buck on an issue that has
>dominated discussion for the better part of a year.
>
>When we chastised Kempthorne for his stance on taxes, it never occurred to
>us that other elected officials would - in turn - assume property taxes were
>only a state issue.
>
>That seems to be the case, though, as the city of Moscow prepares its annual
>budget with yet another hike in property taxes.
>
>Mayor Nancy Chaney's initial budget calls for a 3 percent increase in
>property taxes, the maximum allowed by state law. It's the same 3 percent
>increase the city pushed through last year, and the year before.
>
>As the City Council debated the various line items within Chaney's budget
>and pushed their individual pet projects, no one stepped forward to question
>the increased revenue requested from local taxpayers.
>
>The property tax rate increase comes alongside previous increases in water
>and sewer rates, and projected increases in an assortments of fees and
>permits.
>
>Meanwhile, the Idaho Legislature is mulling the idea of a special session
>because folks are clamoring for some relief from property taxes. The city of
>Moscow is not immune from feelings of frustration about the increasing tax
>burden, and those footing the bill expect each level of government to tread
>cautiously around their pocketbooks.
>
>Certainly, the state plays a role in how much money a homeowner shells out
>each year. That's why we found Kempthorne's approach to tax relief so
>ludicrous in January.
>
>It's equally as ludicrous to set forward a municipal budget with the
>assumption that local folks don't mind shelling out more money because it's
>the city asking rather than the state."