DATE: Sunday, June 1, 1997 TAG: 9705300355 SECTION: SUFFOLK SUN PAGE: 02 EDITION: FINAL COLUMN: FOCAL POINT SOURCE: John Pruitt LENGTH: 78 lines
If the City Council keeps saving us money by not raising our property taxes, a lot of us may wind up in the poor house.
A galling assumption of citizen naivete accompanies council decisions like keeping the property tax rate the same while making it more expensive for us to take a bath, flush the toilet or use a cellular phone, which the city has absolutely no role in providing.
The proposals to raise taxes on everything from cigarettes to water bills do come from the city manager, but council ultimately decides whether to tax by trickery or to acknowledge that the city has so many needs that we'll have to pay a little more in property taxes.
I'm not anxious to pay more for the privilege of owning a house in Suffolk either, but what difference does it make whether we're nickel-and-dimed to death day in and day out or hit a little harder twice a year, via semi-annual taxes? A dollar's a dollar, just like a tax is a tax.
If they're going to keep raising our taxes, why doesn't the city manager and the council just be up front and say so? Well, for one thing, that wouldn't be politically smart - not when council elections roll around next year.
Who, then, wants the distinction of having voted for higher property taxes, assessed to every landowner in Suffolk?
But just like the deeper dipping into our pockets, it's there anyway - just not in twice-a-year reminders.
Maybe voters would be uplifted to have council members say forthrightly: we're not meeting even the basic needs of too many of our citizens, and the only way to remedy that now is through higher property taxes.
Of course, such an imposition should come only after a very determined cost-cutting crusade. Improved efficiencies and trimming might free some badly needed funds for water and sewerage, services that still elude some citizens in even high-tax districts, but certainly not enough.
So what do we do, just keep tacking taxes - or higher taxes - on such things as cellular phone bills, water bills and cigarettes? What's next, a fresh air assessment?
Which gets me back to the cigarette tax. I don't smoke. Neither does anyone in my family, so it wouldn't cost us one penny if Suffolk tacked on a $10-a-pack assessment.
But tell me this: What special service does Suffolk provide to cigarette buyers that they should be paying the city for the privilege of spending their money here?
And how does the city figure that even though cigarettes kill people, that even though smoking is prohibited in municipal buildings, cigarettes are okay as a source of revenue?
If making smoking expensive meant many people would just quit, I'd say, yeah, bring on the tax. Heck, I might even buy cigarettes just for the health of it.
It won't happen. You know, that clean air tax has appeal.
It's as easily justified as a city tax on cellular phone bills.
If ever there was a something-for-nothing scheme, this is it. What does it cost the city for you to have a cellular phone? Nothing. What service does the city provide for you to have it? None. What business of the city's is it whether your bill is $20 or $2,000? None.
If a private enterprise came up with this charge-em, don't-serve-em idea, it probably would be investigated by the Better Business Bureau.
No investigation needed here, though.
Just your city council at work, trying to convince you that your taxes stayed low because your property tax rates were unchanged.
A flush of the toilet to that idea - if you can afford it. ILLUSTRATION: Graphic
LET'S BE TAXING
What are some of your creative ideas for finding things to tax?
Here's are some starters:
A star tax. The more clear nights, the higher the assessment.
A public appearance tax. The more a person appears before
council, the more he pays.
By the way, there's no tax on laughter. So have fun, and let us
hear from you.
Call 934-7553, or send e-mail: Pruitt(AT)Pilotonline.com
Send Suggestions or Comments to
webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu |