North Salt Lake City: City Hall Open House

North Salt Lake City will be remodeling city hall and are holding an open house on Thursday, December 4th 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.

I'm told that it could be a partial remodel, or the old structure could be demolished to make way for a new building. Factors that are being considered in making this decision are.

Earthquake readiness
Additional room for the planning commission
Space for court
Security considerations
Room for the police

The planning commission is meeting elsewhere at the moment. The fire station will be moving. If there are other factors that the city council should consider, please attend on Thursday.

Who is Running a Frugal Campaign?

Dan Liljenquist is into overkill. He appears to have outspent Ron Mortensen more than 12:1 on his campaign for things like $400 for Google Earth Pro. Purpose: Voter mapping software. So, Dan took advantage of Google Earth Pro's ability to import spreadsheet data in order to visualize and target the right demographic. While I'm certain that the result he got from the software was stunning, there are cheap as in free ways of doing the same things that I've used myself using Google Maps. Clearly not as cool, but just as effective.

Is Liljenquist going to be as liberal with taxpayer dollars as he is in his campaign expenditures? Also, note the $11,000 loan he gave to his own campaign.

Commissioner Hansen Not To Run For Reelection

Commissioner Hansen has telegraphed his intention to return to the private sector. His leaving opens the question of what we want most in our County Commission, but let us not forget the good job he tried to do as we look forward.

Commissioner Hansen distinguished himself from the old-guard by donating a good portion of his income to charity, making the point that his job paid too well. I, for one, would have preferred charity for charities sake, rather than giving only to make a political point.

His energy to change attitudes towards taxation seemed diminished after he had been on the job for a while. Maybe he realized that much of his rhetoric fell on deaf ears when it was aimed at his cohorts? Maybe he thought his campaign rhetoric had been wrong? Let's say that he demonstrated a willingness to listen to ways to save money at the county, but he lacked the strength that comes from being an outsider. I wonder how well a blue-dog Democrat would do in his position? I've been told that they would meet criteria that a Republican cannot. They are notable outsiders in Davis County. They are difficult to "fool"--at least they claim as much. I mean, who would join a losing party and then turn around and act the lemming? Is there really a difference between Republican and Democrat in Davis County except that one party wins, while the other languishes?

Commissioner Hansen has been responsible for the on-the-job training that both Downs and Millburn have received. How much their attitudes towards fiscal responsibility have changed since they were elected?

I haven't forgotten the time that the Utah Restaurant Association proposed that Counties pitch in for the cost of advertising for Utah restaurants. I quickly emailed the commission, and had an almost instant reply from Commissioner Hansen expressing his concern that the county not be forced to comply in this regard. That made it into a bill that was considered by the legislature. How fortunate were we that A) Our county paid enough attention so as not to volunteer to subsidize the advertisements, and B) they put forward the right kind of lobbying effort to stop a bill that would force the subsidy, and C) the legislature did not fall into the trap and pass the bill. In this regard, Alan Hansen did very well in my eyes, and I'll be sad to see him go.

Salt Lake Trib: Davis Commissioner Hansen won't seek re-election

RAP Rant

Joshua thought it so important that I get straightened out on my views that he posted this rant to my post about the RAP tax. (It appeared twice, so I deleted the superfluous one) I'll let it stand on its own without comment from me.

"If you are that anti-tax why then do we pay our public officials with tax dollars? Public officials that you support. Why do we have any community services at all? Are you opposed to parks? Youth Sports and other community sponsered events? Should we do away with road maitenance or the fire and police departments? No no no, I am sure you consider those "needs". Basic civil services right? Well I am being taxed for them, yet I have never had NEED of the fire department, nor the police. I own a 4 wheel drive vehicle so I really don't care if the roads are bad. Why don't the private individuals who want those services pay for it and leave my money alone. I have no kids so i have no NEED for public education anymore yet they steal my money and tax my property to pay for it. HOW DARE THEY?! Those tax and spend liberals! The fact of the matter is this, we are taxed, where that tax money goes is a whole other question. Personally I would much rather see bright a new beacon of culture and sophistication grace my county then yet another strip mall, or another subdivision. Working in the real estate field I am stunned every day how much government assitance is given to "private sector" projects. For once it would be nice to see a project that is solely for the people have a chance to get up off the ground.

Oh, and anyone who is TRULY a fan of Shakespeare wants it forced on everyone. It goes with the territory. Reading a couple of sonets and seeing plays doesn't create a Shakespearian Dramturge. However his is always the first name to be pulled to try and make oneself sound cultured. The Bard worship doesn't impress anyone into thinking you really are "pro-arts". And thats okay, you don't have to be. The world is full because of all types in it.

You have a group of people in this area who want to do something great, who want to share their gifts with all around. They need a proper place to do it in. You wouldn't ask the firemen to try and do what they do with out trucks and a station. We obviously don't ask our mayor and city council to operate out of the basement of the mayors home. This group wants to give back to their community the best way they know how, they have tried for years to figure out on how to do it alone, and have gotten about half way there. All they are asking is for everyone to pitch in 1 penny for every 1 dollar you are going to spend fo eight years. That is less then the change you will lose in your sofa or in cleaning out your car. 1 penny at a time to build a place that ALL residents would be proud to have in their community. It is sad when we can't muster up even that amount of generosity of spirit to affect change for good in our communities because of fear-mongers, decrying "legalized plunder" and "tax and spend liberals". I would have you know on an interesting side note that the people who are highest up in this group are FAR FAR from liberal democrates. They are as ultra-conservitive republican as I have ever met. They just happen to be able to see the world for what it is and not what they want it to be."

More Property Tax Increases

Legislators may soon require counties to increase their property taxes to increase funding for county health departments. This because federal dollars are getting reduced, or are tied to specific programs according to Dr. Gary House, of the Weber-Morgan County Health Department.

"At the federal level, we're seeing a shift in their funding priorities. We're getting money for things like bioterrorism."

I've heard this argument made before by the Davis County Health Department. They suggest the federal dollars are the reason we should increase funding. I get reimbursed for certain expenses by my employer, so should I be asking for a raise because of how I am paid?

I think that we should have funding for bioterrorism, and for things like pandemics. Is House suggesting otherwise? In my mind the county is perfectly situation to arrange the stockpile of vaccines in a way that the individual cannot. If bird-flu strikes my town, I can't be expected to have a personal supply of vaccine.

The Salt Lake Tribune implied in its reporting that it is the state lawmakers job to "control health spending." This could not be more wrong. How many of our recent property tax increases have come because of the legislature? How many because of the county commission, or school board? Part of the blame for this misconception lies with those who are asking for the mandatory tax increase, however.

Dr. David Blodgett, director of the Southwest Utah Public Health Department asked for a property tax increase, but if not given that, he suggested a tax on cigarettes which could be earmarked for anti-cigarette campaigns and treatment. Is anyone else catching the irony implicit in this suggestion? In fact, the better job the health department did, the worse their funding would get. It would be a completely self-destructive tax if the campaign to eliminate smoking were to succeed.

Clearly, the folks asking for this money haven't thought it through enough.

And, Davis county has already increased funding for the health department, and we can see the results of that increase this year. If the legislature steps in, we'd see another increase next year. This despite the fact that we have a $242 million surplus. Less money than last year, but more than enough to match the $30 million dollars in infrastructure spending that health departments need this year.

"We will have the money to fund the essentials," according to Representative Ron Bigelow.

The Deseret News is reporting that there are $200 million in unspent funds this year from state departments and colleges. From the article.

"It is alarming, some of these large carry-overs, especially two years in a row," said House Majority Leader Dave Clark, R-Santa Clara. "Why do we do this?"

Hat tip: Citizens For Tax Fairness.org

A Response To Three Anti-Voucher Facts

Let me respond to three arguments that are coming out of the anti-voucher camp that are factually based.

Vouchers are a subsidy.

True, vouchers would be money applied by the government to the private sector that benefits the public. Voucher supporters usually respond that this is a lot like what the government currently does with public education. There are differences, however. Public education is not only funded by the government, it is also administered by the government. Usually, fiscal conservatives oppose subsidies because it puts the government in the position to choose which private ventures will succeed or fail. In the case of education, however, the government is already doing this. Private schools are at a disadvantage to public schools, because of the government, in that they can fail if the money dries up. Public education funding does not fail. It may come short of expectations, but accounts remain stocked with taxpayer dollars.

Can you imagine a circumstance under which public education fails to get any funding?

Voucher money will go to religious schools

Voucher money will go to some non-secular schools as well as secular schools. This falls short of an endorsement of one religion over another by the government because it is parents that will choose where the dollars go, not the government. If vouchers pass in November, voucher opponents may choose to use the courts to argue this point. The courts will have to decide whether having parents as the intermediary between the government and private schools is enough to leave vouchers in place.

Vouchers will not create diversity

Let me tell you two other things that tend toward greater homogeneity. Where we live, and with whom we live. People of certain socio-economic classes tend to live in the same neighborhoods, and people generally choose to marry those of the same age, race, and status. The children born to us tend to be genetically, and ideologically like us. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, unless you can think of a reason that children should not look like their parents.

There is an interesting side-effect of all of this. Public school boundaries are generally drawn to enclose an area, as opposed to cherry-picking children from different areas. As a result public schools lack the very diversity that voucher opponents value so highly. Private schools, on the other hand, draw their students from larger geographical areas--an effect of their being fewer public, than private schools. Even middle, and lower, class students can attend private school if their families will make the requisite sacrifices (think of the big screen T.V. housed within a mobile home).

North Salt Lake In Discussion Over Library

They have a novel idea on how to do it.

Don't raise taxes. Save for the future!

What a strange idea.

Save.

via Deseret News.

Utah Site Visit 2007: Question Answered

I asked a question about un-funded mandates of the legislature and received this response.

Utah Site Visit 2007:Un-funded Mandates

Standard Examiner: Davis County Elected Officials: Tax and Spend Liberals

I awoke prepared to give a rundown of the tax increases we've seen in this county over the last five years only to find that it had been done for me.

This Op-Ed, by Ron Mortensen, in the Standard Examiner tells the tale.

Standard Examiner: Davis County Elected Officials: Tax and Spend Liberals?

Truth In Taxation: Listening To The Public

I went to the tax hearing tonight, and I have decided to offer some suggestions for those who wish to speak at a County "Truth in Taxation" hearing in the future.

If your home just got assessed at a higher value than before.

• Don't say, "This assessment is unfair".
• Do say, "This tax is unfair".
• Don't say, "The schools here are built like the Taj Mahal"
• Do say, "The Jail is a Taj Mahal"

Now let me explain. Assessments don't matter one iota if the taxes are unfair. Your home could be worth a dime and if the county takes half of it to pay for wasteful projects, then it is the tax you should protest, not the assessment!

The reason we don't talk about the cost of schools in front of the commission is that the school board is their own taxing entity. Please, please attend school board meetings when you can and tell them about their boondoggles. Use the passion that you expressed tonight to show the school board their impact on your lives. The jail, or the Conference Center, or anything else under the county purview is fair game for discussion when at a commission meeting.

Now I think that this commission did hear the people, but they were clumsy at responding. I have some suggestions for the elected officials there tonight. These hearings are not for the elected officials to "educated" the people. It is for the elected to listen to those who elected them. The citizenry may get technical details wrong, but it is their will that should give direction to your actions. You are elected to learn the details, and know how to carry it out. If you were elected to do a $100,000 a year job, then give us just that much value in return. (An aside, it seems that this commission may be voting in the future for a pay cut for themselves. Or, so it would seem.)

Now, I had to leave at 8:00 P.M. so I missed a vote from this commission, but I think they probably tabled the vote until they could reconsider the particulars of this budget, and perhaps the previously passed tax increase. Hopefully, they will use their intelligence to carry out the will of the people.

It is clear what the people want. When a gym full of mostly senior citizens show up to take back control of their lives, then the commission would be remiss not to give something back.

Something like those excess tax dollars!

(Note: if you went to the meeting tonight and can report on what occurred-especially after I left then please leave a comment)

Property Tax Hearings: Spitting Into The Wind

I've been debating whether it is worth my time to attend the County hearing tomorrow night as I had planned. I am coming off a little shrill on my blog as I get closer to this event, and I'm not sure that I'm going to have an impact this time. Here is why.

• I never got a response to my email sent a week ago, to the commission, on the proposed budget.
• The most logical move for the commission, given that they remained silent on the tax increase, is to increase the budget to the levels requested. This translates into a nearly 50 percent increase in spending this year over last.
• Although, there were a dozen responses to my poll indicating opinion is firmly against the budget increase, and last December's attendants to the "Truth in Taxation Hearing" were overwhelmingly opposed to the increase, the commission voted in the increase. The current commission have remained silent on that fact--even now.

Reducing County Taxes: A New York Case Study

Oneida County, in New York State, has spent the last couple years, reducing spending in order to give taxes back.

That's right! I said New York.

In a press release in 2005, the current county leadership announced it had cut county jobs, and despite the unfunded mandates passed down by the State, kept tax increases down. Said the county executive at that time.

"This is a time of great opportunity here in Oneida County and we need to nurture this growth to attract more jobs and people," Griffo added. "The long-term future of Oneida County rests in making this a place where people want to live, work and build. Our county’s growth in jobs can spur home sales. We want low property tax rates to make that growth even better."

That was 2005. What about 2007? The new county executive has delivered and has promised the following.

• I will not raise property taxes.
• I will continue to eliminate positions.
• I will continue to hold down general fund spending.

Those who favor high taxes may remind me that this New York County benefited from tobacco settlement money.

This is true, however the county continues to cut county jobs to favor growth. The private sector there provided more than a thousand new jobs in 2005. That is the kind of shift we should want to see here. The more government jobs are traded in for private jobs the better!

"Taxes do not occur in a vacuum. The people who pay taxes are facing increased prices
for basic foods such as bread, and gasoline prices that are still above where they were three years
ago. Senior citizens are getting Social Security increases that don’t keep pace with the cost of
living. Taxpayers should not give the government more because it means giving their families
less."

This rhetoric has been matched by action in New York. We can do the same here.

Property Taxes: Justifications

Thanks to Jeremy for balancing out the property tax discussion. As he works for the County Assessors Office that is a good thing.

Jeremy links to this editorial by the Standard Examiner.

"In other words, if you don't want to pay higher taxes for the new jail, figure out a way to keep your kids and your neighbors from breaking the law and having to be locked up. And, while you're at it, tell the school district that it doesn't get any increased funding for new schools to educate the waves of children who arrive expecting to be educated every year. And just learn to make do with antiquated flood control as new subdivisions and shopping centers grow like weeds across all available open land.

And tell senior citizens they won't be getting any increases in funding for their programs and needs, even though their numbers are skyrocketing, too.

Somehow, we don't think those arguments are going to fly. It makes for great campaign sloganeering and anti-government bellowing to complain about higher taxes, but where would you make the cuts? The kids? The seniors? Public safety? Public health?"

Somehow I don't think that this editorials main argument flies. Mainly because they are asking the wrong questions. Here is what I would ask.

Is the government able to do the thing that it wants better than the private sector? Is the government able to pay for what it must provide, without raising taxes? By providing these services, will the government foster dependency upon the government that would not exist otherwise?

Y-intercept argues that "You should never have to raise taxes to pay for maintenance." I agree. The reasons we do raise taxes for such things are summarized on todays post.

"If you do, it generally means one of two things. Either the people who planned the infrastructure in the first place did a really bad job. The more likely scenario is that politicians diverted the budget set aside for maintenance to other less worthy projects."

The Standard argues that 'seniors needs are skyrocketing too'. Again, we have a lot of senior citizens in the county. They have to pay taxes too! Are we creating a class of people that must depend upon the government for survival?

Oppose Tax Increase: Eight Days Left

You may not have seen the poll that's running on the sidebar of this blog. There are only fourteen votes so far. Please take the opportunity to vote now if you haven't already. If you have voted, and can figure out a way to cheat, please vote against the tax increase that happened last December!

Keep in mind, there is an inaccuracy on the poll indicating that the tax increase was 49.5%, but that is actually the budgetary spending increase.

Property Tax Relay: Passing The Baton

The Utah Rattler has picked up on the property tax meme, following closely on the heels of the Utah Taxpayer, and Jeremy's Jeremiad.

One more link needs to go the Citizens For Tax Fairness.

Thanks for your attention to this important issue.

An Open Letter To The Davis County Commission

I'm concerned about the recent notice informing us of a proposed 49.5% increase in the county budget. Of course, this follows a tax increase implemented by a lame-duck commission last December. My question is why is the current commission taking its marching orders, by increasing spending, from a body of people that no longer convene? The move of the former commission was so unpopular with the public that there were only two out of a dozen people that spoke in favor of the tax at the hearing.

It could be said of Commissioner Milburn, that he had a mandate to act to keep spending low, considering how smartly he beat the incumbent, Mr. McConkie, while campaigning on the issue of low taxes. It seems, however, that he is more interested in passing accountability onto the citizenry when he says that tax hearings are "an opportunity for the residents to do their own prioritization."

I would hope that this newly elected body would begin their public service more modestly, and restrict spending. Note, we, in the south part of the county recently received our new property assessments and found that the value of our homes have increased greatly. Our personal budgetary concerns are high enough without the new high watermark set by an increase in this years budget. What will be required in taxes from us in future years if we ratchet up our spending now?

Let me remind you that the former body of commissioners have no authority to mandate how you spend our taxes. They acted contrary to the will of the people in raising taxes, and you would be remiss to ignore us now.

Tyler Farrer

Property Taxes: Four Points Of Pain

There are four principles at play here with our property taxes that ought to be addressed.

First, most of the south end of Davis County had their assessed property values go up this year. For me, I'll pay $300 more dollars than last. Many will pay more than that. I think it's only fair to be taxed on the correct value of your home. That's a real number, and the fact that so many got reassessed just goes to show the good work that our County Assessor is doing.

This brings me to point two. There is only so much money more than the previous years budget that the county is allowed to take in. This means that with the many reassessments that happened, and home values increasing, the county is going to have to lower the county portion of the tax rate. But the solution to this problem is intrinsically unfair to the individual, while it is balanced in the favor of the larger population. Let's say that half the county had their home values increase and now pay more. When the rates are lowered, the half whose home values stay the same will have a disproportionate amount of money flowing back their way. $100 of my dollars, for example, could flow into the bank of someone, let's call him Joe, who did not earn that $100. Now next year, hypothetically, my home is not reassessed at a higher value and Joe's $100 flows back to me. There are some who would say that both Joe and I profited in the exchange!

When money travels via government channels there is no such thing as a profit, only plunder! Bastiat called it "legalized plunder". It is the taking of money from one who earned it to give to another that did not earn it.

Point three is that, last December, the retiring county commission voted to increase taxes by 32%. As their terms expired they spread a myth that because actual dollars flowing into the coffers of the county from a tax increase is less than the dollars coming in from county growth that the tax was small! They said that the tax increase was insignificant!

The tax increase was a 32% increase, and that is statistically significant no matter how you fudge the numbers!

Point four is that what naturally flows from a tax increase, with extra dollars flooding in, is an increase in expenditures. This new commission intends to vote to increase spending by 49.5%. This spending increase, plus the tax increase, is a slap in the face to those of us who are now paying on more valuable properties than last year. It is an affront to those who just purchased a home in the county for the first time this year when the housing market was hot! It's offensive to those whose home assessments increase by 250% this year(as happened to my brother). It will prevent people from moving here that would otherwise, and it will give incentives for others to leave the county.

It has been pointed out to me that Davis County is second in our senior citizen population only to Washington County. This means that there is a high number of seniors on fixed incomes that will have to rely upon the government if the county increases spending. We can let these folks pay for themselves by keeping their taxes low, or we can push them into the open arms of the government.

Just don't tell me that they will profit by it, as the county did last December!

Dealing With Growth In Government

I'm not endorsing Rudy for President--In fact, this is not the venue for a discussion of a Federal office. I'm fully behind someone else, in truth. (Note: comments to this post about Presidential politics, unrelated to local issues, will be ridiculed at best, and deleted at worst. You have been warned!). However, Rudy as Mayor of New York City did some things I'd like to see imitated locally.

Here is the audio from an ad running now in Iowa. Here is a whiff of it.

"I was given a report, shortly after I was Mayor-Elect, and the report was all of the things that should be done to take New York City out of the deficit. The biggest ones were raise taxes. They asked me what I was going to do with the report..."

Now ask yourself, WWRD? (What would Rudy do)

Lame-Ducks Tax: Sophmore Commission Spends

Remember the Average value of a home in Davis County last December was 180,000? That estimate has gone up in eight short months to 210,000.

That's good right?

Not if you live in Davis County.

The County has reassessed the values of homes in South Davis County this year, and has jumped at the opportunity to increase spending to match. They want to increase spending by nearly 50%.

I will pay 303.13 more this year, than last, if the new budget is approved! That is remarkably higher than the average 61.79 on a $210,000 residence. And, my home's value is below average.

If the budget increase is not approved, I will pay 90.64 less than if it is not.

What will the county tell me if I ask?

'Well, you'll be paying $30 of $90 to the School District. It's not our fault. You're only paying us $53.64!'

My problem is that I can't afford to increase my tax budget by 50%! Not without cutting something else. $300 dollars is the cost of an affordable bathtub. $300 is an annual membership for one person at the Bountiful Rec Center.

Spending Your Childrens Future

If the board approves the local tax increase, it would mean homeowners would pay an additional $17 a year on a $190,000 home, which is estimated to be a median-priced home in Davis County. Board members are trying to be cautious about raising property taxes, but they need the money for the $555 million budget for the 2007-2008 year to work.

Davis County Clipper

[italics are mine]

Translation: Davis County School Board has budgeted for money that is not there. When private citizens do that, they end up in the poor house. I'm anticipating a pay raise this summer, but if I put in a pool on that assumption, I'd have to send my crazy cousin Eddie to kidnap my boss.

Hat tip: UtahRattler