An interesting tidbit that was lingering in an online cache and I wanted to blog: "Acting City Manager Troy Schulte now confirms the city is looking into a possible increase in the utility tax on Kansas City homeowners - if voters don't renew the earnings tax next April."
Again, this is confirmation of a simple fact:
IF THE E-TAX IS REPEALED KANSAS CITY RESIDENTS WILL FACE AN EVEN GREATER TAX BURDEN!!!
This isn't theoretical garbage about increased revenues or land use harebrained schemes . . . EVERYBODY KNOWS plans are in the works to make life in Kansas City more expensive with MORE TAXES if the E-Tax is repeals. Given this FACT, keeping the burden on suburban interlopers doesn't seem like such a horrible idea.
More BS scare tactics. Truth is ...
ReplyDelete1)It lets voters in St. Louis and Kansas City decide in future local elections whether to keep the earnings tax or phase it out gradually over 10 years.
2)Prop A prohibits the politicians from imposing any new local earnings taxes on working people and businesses in other Missouri cities and towns.
6:28 The taxes under discussion aren't earnings taxes. They are sales taxes, property taxes, and utility taxes. If you think taxes can't be raised, you must be smoking some really good stuff.
ReplyDeleteJust to keep things in perspective, please remeber that if the e-tax is repealed, it gradually goes away at 10% a year. That's a full ecade of adjustment and planning, so the dire predictions are based on fear-mongering and the notion that KCMO municipal government is completely incompetent.
ReplyDeleteUh, oh!
Quit trying to blame city government.
ReplyDeleteIt's a social / cultural problem.
People choose to live Kansas City and have raised their children poorly when it comes to fiscal management.
Let's see...
ReplyDelete40 percent of the e-tax is paid by non-KCMO residents. That's about $80 million.
So, if the e-tax goes away, guess who gets to make up the difference.
If we got rid of the Jokers in City Hall making up 80 million would be easy.
ReplyDelete40% is more like $180 million of the city's general fund (which is about $450 million total). Loss of that money would be a death blow to the city over the next ten years, unless they could make some of it up with higher property, sales and utility taxes.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the people of KC will realize this and pull their head out of the sand before the vote.
ReplyDelete$80 million is the amount the city wastes on underperforming TIF's and the Power & Light district. Raise the taxes on the P&L and quit using TIF's.
ReplyDeleteSchulte and many others in town have become so accustomed to the graft, excess, and corruption that they have accepted this as an acceptable category in the budget. He should be developing plans to eliminate that instead of putting the burden on the tax payers. Stop the theft.
ReplyDeleteLOL@ the retards in KC who think this is a bad idea. I live in Lees Summit, so I can laugh when you make me quit paying the taxes. I will laugh at your outrageous taxes that will replace all the money my wife and I are paying. If you people were smart, you'd keep it in place.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are some real dumbasses in KC who would vote this down just to spite their face.
It will phased it out gradually over 10 years so none of the above scenarios would happen. It's a slow phase out plan. BUT if you like having your money spent on TIF and wasted projects by city hall then keep the etax.
ReplyDeleteThe general fund is not used on TIF.
ReplyDelete10 Years is not a long time to phase out $200 million. This burden would be placed on solely on the people of KCMO. It's also going to be hard to tax many of the thousands of vacated properties in Jackson County.
ReplyDelete200 million ??????? City Hall will waste that in less than 10 years. Get rid of the E-Tax.
ReplyDeleteAlso remember that in May 2010 KCMO entered into an agreement with the EPA to upgrade the sewage system to prevent stormwater sewage overflows. That will be a huge tax increase to KCMO property owners over 25 years to pay for it, estimated to cost $2.5 billion dollars.
ReplyDeleteIf the e-tax repeal goes forward, KCMO will be well on the road to becoming the next Detroit.
Also remember that in May 2010 KCMO entered into an agreement with the EPA to upgrade the sewage system to prevent stormwater sewage overflows. That will be a huge tax increase to KCMO property owners over 25 years to pay for it, estimated to cost $2.5 billion dollars.
ReplyDeleteIf the e-tax repeal goes forward, KCMO will be well on the road to becoming the next Detroit.
The 200 million is almost half the general fund.
ReplyDeleteWhich do you prefer -- trash pickup twice a month, or increased taxes?
Or, maybe, the e-tax isn't so bad after all.
To everyone who is screaming about the waste at City Hall... there is not that much waste to cut folks. So in all fairness... what would you agree to cut to make up the E-tax shortfall? Kansas Citians are short sighted if they eliminate this tax, especially since 40% of it is paid for by people from outside the city limits. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
ReplyDeleteLet's see some real discussion on what could be cut. And how about some thoughtful ideas, not just the blanket of "waste"... unless you actually can accurately identify that waste and detail it.
I for one don't like paying the tax, but don't want it to go away in this economy and with our city in this financial situation. Our bonding abilities will be curtailed enough, given that the E-tax will have to be voted upon again in five years.
No I'd rather have the E-Tax spent on co-mayor lawsuits,failed city projects backed by special interests, mast pension plan failures etc. Then after the General fund has been depleted have the fools in City Hall still raise Taxes.
ReplyDelete"there is not that much waste to cut folks. So in all fairness"-----
ReplyDeleteOh please ! Give your brain a chance.
Cindy Circo just "found" $1.1mil to spend on a park (that no one in the area wants)... and you're saying there's no waste in KC. Gimme a break!! TIFs ARE being paid off with this slush fund.
ReplyDeleteI live in JOCO,Parkville, Lee's Summit, Gladstone, etc. etc. and work in KCMO and pay the 1% ETax. So you repeal the tax and I get to put a nice sum of money back in my pocket and some poor person on the east side has to have their sales tax or property tax raised to make up the difference. City Hall cost are not going down even with the greatest leadership - at best they hold flat and the money still needs to be made up.
ReplyDeleteSo I save a $1000 bucks a year and you pay more for a loaf of bread. Thanks but no thanks, I would rather come into work in a city that works and not some place with the trash piling up, the snow not moved, insufficient code inspection, even more crime because of lack of policing and on and on... Keep my grand please.
Circo didn't "find" one million; that money was to be used for 5th district parks. Most of that money was paid through the "in lieu of parkland" rule and could not be used for maintenance or anything else. Riley knew about the money and the proposed park improvements as well. Nothing was done in secret or out of turn.
ReplyDeleteTIFS are not being paid out of this fund, so get an education.
There is not $200 or even $20 left to cut. Deal with the fact that if the E-tax goes away, services will go down and fees will go up.
10:39... I agree with you on the lawsuits, MAST, etc. but that just means more than ever, we need Funk out.
Give my brain a chance? I did . . . and I cannot identify waste that comes out of the general fund.
ReplyDeleteLawsuits against the mayor? OK, don't settle the lawsuit. Continue paying costs associated with the suit and risk a judgment at the end. That makes sense.
"with the trash piling up, the snow not moved, insufficient code inspection, even more crime because of lack of policing"
ReplyDeleteLike where do you live????
Because in Kansas City this is already going on.
OK Einstein pay for the co-mayors lawsuits. City Hall and the Politicians just love people like you.
ReplyDelete""with the trash piling up, the snow not moved, insufficient code inspection, even more crime because of lack of policing"
ReplyDeleteLike where do you live????
Because in Kansas City this is already going on."
That is going on idiot, but don't you see how much worse it will get - you want to have all things but have a plan for none of them!!
The suit was because of the co-mayors, but it was AGAINST the city as well. Blame the co-mayors if you want, but given that the City was a defendant settling was a wise decision.
ReplyDeleteThe alternative? A potential judgment for an even bigger sum that would have had to be paid.
What a lot of people may not realize is the e-tax has chased so many jobs out of state to Kansas.
ReplyDeleteToday Missouri is a net outsourcer of jobs to Kansas. When Missouri residents work in Kansas, all of their income tax goes to Kansas rather than Missouri. A lot more of their purchases, the economic activity those jobs create, etc., primarily goes to benefit Kansas. The e-tax has driven a lot of high paying jobs into Kansas to the point where the median Kansas job pays 30% more than Missouri. The Missouri side still has more public sector jobs, but private jobs continue to flock to Kansas, and the e-tax is a big driver of that. The e-tax makes the cities that have them have the highest income tax rates in their regions and that ultimately costs jobs and particularly high paying ones.
Wouldn't a replacement tax or decreased services also chase jobs to Kansas? In other words, how does repealing the e-tax really address that issue?
ReplyDeleteNO.
ReplyDeleteOh, I see. . . . well, your one word negation of the question is quite unconvincing.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't explain what decrease in services or what the replacement tax was. So your question was nebulous.
ReplyDeleteAlright, o great and erudite one . . .
ReplyDeletePresume that I want to maintain the level of services. What tax can be imposed that won't have the same negative effects as the e-tax and that won't have other negative effects that could be deemed just as bad.
WOW you really honed in on that with laser like definitions. Like ---- the "level of services" and "other negative effects".
ReplyDeleteThe Utility tax is already one of the highest taxes we pay! So let's burden us with trying to keep water, lights, etc on, but maintain shoveling money into corporate welfare?? Where are the priorities in this city?
ReplyDeleteIt is a myth that the E-tax is driving jobs to KS. KS is luring jobs away with huge incentives that they are not going to be able to honor. Other things might also help lure folks to Kansas, such as good schools, but it is not the E-tax.
ReplyDeleteSo far, not one comment in this thread has thoughtfully laid out a compelling argument to repeal the tax, but there have been several good points made for keeping it.
I'm voting to keep the E-tax. Don't love it, but we need it.
I'm for repealing the e TAX. don't live in KC. It DESERVES to be Detroit...or East St Louis.
ReplyDeleteIt does NOT deserve to remain the cultural center of the metro. Bad leadership, too much crime. Arrogant unions, poor schools.
JOCO should have built an airport and told KCMO to screw itself. Which it has. Way too many people on the take... too much taxpayer money diverted to KCMO contractors over bullshit.
KCMO government should have taken care of its citizens instead of expecting its citizens to take care of IT.
Use taxes and sales taxes are a good thing. Earnings taxes aren't. KCMO is just soaking the suburbanites by making them pay for their own community services and Kansas City's. Very unjust.
$147 million in sales tax revenue (STAR) bonds that Kansas has pledged for the $400 million-plus project...this is why Kansas got the soccer fields. Seems like a state issue BUT for the fact that this do nothing City Council never developed a rapport with the State of Missouri to obtain funding for our own BUS SERVICE, let alone a soccer stadium. Every one of these do nothings had their own agenda, from undermining everything Funk wanted to purposely voting against anything Wayne Cauthan wanted simply because he had hurt their feelings. Lousy, piece of crap city we live in deserves to go straight to hell. The current council will surely follow, if they continue to only care about their political futures and what benefits them, not the residents of KC.
ReplyDeleteFunk underminded what Funk wanted, especially when he had the Squid sit on his lap when the Cerner/soccer people had to go to his house to take a meeting with him. It was by all accounts grotesque. That helped kill the deal.
ReplyDelete7:35, those suburbanites use our services daily... why shouldn't they help pay for them?
ReplyDeleteServices? You mean pot hole streets. broken water pipes, frivolous lawsuits, violent crime and murder? Those are services?
ReplyDelete