Johnson County is the only major metro county* in the state with no local option sales taxes. But ever since the Temple of Consumerism (a/k/a Coral Ridge Mall) opened in `98, the sales tax has been a tempting treat for local governments.
* OK, so I'm applying an Iowa standard to the phrase "major metro."
The Iowa City School District is looking at taking a bite. County Supervisor Rod Sullivan shot this out to his email list this week:
Dear Progressive Friends:
The issue of a sales tax is once again before us.
The ICCSD Board will be discussing the matter at their February 14 meeting.
We need to help our elected officials recognize that a local option sales tax would fall directly upon those who can least afford it.
The people the ICCSD serves every day are the very people who would be burdened. Children are our poorest segment of society. I will quote one of my favorite authors, Jonathon Kozol: "Charity is no substitute for economic justice."
You cannot raise money for Family Resource Centers and believe they will make up for the damage done by a local option sales tax. The ICCSD and other governmental agencies cannot improve their budget situations on the backs of the poorest of the poor. The needs of the poor will outpace any and all services that they have helped to fund.
Sales tax proponents frequently use the argument, "Sales taxes are better than property taxes." This argument is akin to saying, "Drinking is better than smoking, so we need more smoking." Neither tax option is good for the poor.
What's more, the argument that higher property taxes are automatically passed on to renters is simply false. Studies show conclusively that housing costs depend primarily upon the supply and demand of housing, not property taxes.
In the ICCSD, parents and kids at Twain, Wood, and Hills will pay about the same amount as parents and kids at Wickham, Lincoln, and Shimek. Does this make sense?
I cannot, in good conscience, support a shift of the tax burden to people who have less money. What's more, I have trouble saying that a person earning $25,000 should pay more tax just because she lives in Williamsburg, Riverside, West Branch, Mount Vernon, Tipton, etc. Especially when the local wealthy would be let off the hook at her expense.
I encourage you to take quick and decisive action to oppose any sales tax proposals. I hope you will consider acting proactively.
Sales taxes impact those least able to pay to a much greater degree than they affect others. I have been a proud opponent of each of the last three attempts (all failed) at passing a local option sales tax. Over 70% of the voting public has seen fit to agree with me each time.
Look at the Iowa City Public Library. It is undoubtedly the most popular institution in Johnson County. Parents have issues with the school district; rarely do they have issues with the Public Library. Yet that same Library was on the wrong end of a 70-30 vote. And that election was held in the midst of an economic boom!
But in difficult budget times, the issue continues to resurface. I urge you to preemptively contact the ICCSD to speak against this action.
I urge you to show up at the ICCSD Boardroom Tuesday, February 14 at 7 PM to oppose a sales tax.
Some history and rules:
A bond issue needs 60% to pass in Iowa. In most cases, you start off with about 20% that's going to vote NO on anything, for reasons of ideology (read my lips) or self-interest ("MY kids are done with school" or, more charitably, "the farm's barely making it"). That means to pass a bond, you have to get 3/4 of the remaining voters, and that's a steep hill to climb. And that's before you even factor in other reasons for opposition, such as dislike of a specific proposal.
But a sales tax only needs 50%, and is easier to portray (falsely) as something that's a "choice", that "someone else pays."
Every precinct in Johnson County voted no on a sales tax in 1999. (Word to the wise: never schedule a vote on a money issue the day before property taxes are due. And always schedule your pool vote for the hottest day of summer.) Iowa City would have used a chunk of the loot on a library; a year and a half later a BOND issue for the library passed with 67%.
While there were some read my lips types voting no on the sales tax, the predominant argument was regressivity.
There were some feints at a school sales tax in 2002, but the district decided to pursue a bond instead. That one passed with 71% - almost everyone but the Automatic No Vote.
Sullivan, then chair of the county Democratic Party, worked on that campaign, and so did I. So it's not funding for education that Rod and I are questioning - it's the regressive mechanism of a sales tax.
No comments:
Post a Comment