Currently	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
21°
Fog/Mist	44° 33°	49° 31°	45° 27°	49° 29°	48° 29°

Keep mill levy flat

Steve Sauder - Emporia

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Johnny Cash sang “I can hear that train a comin’…”

In Lyon County, taxpayers are singing “We can feel the tax increase comin’” because our county commissioners are rumbling toward adopting a budget with a 5.5-mill property tax increase.

This increase is being justified by needed repairs to roads and bridges caused by the weather. Although those needs are real, they shouldn’t be handled with a blank check and only after a detailed plan is in hand.

The best news is that the budget hasn’t been adopted yet, leaving time for commissioners to apply the brakes, but today’s study session might be our last hope.

School districts have tightened their budgets with staff reductions, furloughs and building closings.

Emporia city is holding the line by adopting a deficit spending plan funded by reserves made possible by actions taken earlier to prepare for this situation. Time will tell if their plan is successful, but there is no mill increase in the Emporia city budget.

That leaves only Lyon County .

Several years ago, Lyon County taxpayers supported a new sales tax with the understanding it would help keep property taxes in check. The 5.5-mill increase proposed by county staff will certainly test the taxpayers’ trust level if adopted.

My suggestion is that the commissioners look hard at recent spending increases and roll back budgets to keep the mill levy flat.

Easy? Of course not, but department budgets have grown across the board in recent years.

Where should they look?

How about starting with the departments where the greatest growth has occurred?

Here’s an interesting fact — of the Lyon County budget, 36 percent is spent on police and safety.

When you consider that nearly four out of five Lyon County residents also pay for the operation of the fully staffed and funded Emporia Police Department, you start to wonder just how much law enforcement do we really need?

The study on law enforcement consolidation a few years ago didn’t provide overwhelming evidence for such a move, but it did strongly suggest “dispatch” was an area where duplication was present, yet we still have two dispatch centers.

The time is right for our county commission to think outside the box and lead the effort to downsize government. Without such an effort it’s doubtful the taxpayers will be so willing to approve the next sales tax question.

Comments

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

True words.

Too late.

September 1, 2010 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

bobhornet (anonymous) says...

Maybe we need to get rid of the crooks that are running our county government. This is yet another example of why citizens need to be informed--and need to vote!

September 1, 2010 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

I wonnder has Mr. Sauder been to any of the City Budget and County Public Budget hearings and protested about the excessive and unnecessary spending ?

I certainly don' t recall seeing him at any !

And wasn' t Mr. Sauder one of the major proponents and supporters of the recent sales tax extension, which he touted as the single most important thing in keeping the property tax mil levy from being increased ? Oh, thats right he's one of the big " Honchos " of the RDA isn' t he . So I guess he really wouldn' t want to shoot himself in his own foot would he ?

Make up your mind Mr. Sauder. You can' t be on both sides of the river at the same time.

September 1, 2010 at 3:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...

Don't do away with the county sheriff. It is not hyperbole to say that state governrs and county sheriffs form the last line of defense against tyranny and oppression. The sheriff is the last line of defense for constitutional rights. Buy the book The County Sheriff America's Last Hope. If you have time, it is on You Tube The County Sheriff America's Last Hope Richard Mack Oath Keeper 1 of 7.

September 1, 2010 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

Meth, can you show me where it stated the tax extension was supposed to prevent an increase in property tax? I don't recall seeing that. I do recall that it was supposed to curtail an increase.

September 1, 2010 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

On the sales tax question itself, as it appeared on the ballot, one section reads as follows:

"...such tax to be used for general governmental purposes including providing funds to (a) promote industrial and economic development in the city and (b) reduce city levied property taxes, provided that such retailers' sales tax shall terminate on December 31, 2024 all pursuant to KSA 2009 supp.12-187, ET SEQ., as amended?"

Would you say that part (b) would cause people to vote "Yes" because they believe doing so would save a raise in property taxes?

September 1, 2010 at 3:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

It doesn't say prevent, it doesn't say curtail. It says "reduce."

Got this word for word today from the courthouse.

September 1, 2010 at 3:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

create,

You are absolutely right about the State statute and sales tax useage. What you looked up at the courthouse is the actual State Statute on sales tax usage.

Irish,

I was going to refer you to the State of Kansas website that deals with local sales tax usage, but create already give you the exact wording of part of the State Statute.

Therefore as I see it at least the County is in violation of Kansas Sales tax Statute " KSA 2009 supp. 12-187, ET SEQ, as amended . " The City may also be in violation of the same State Statute if they do not use the sales tax to " reduce City levied property taxes. " -

And yes both the City and County, misrepresented what the Kansas State Sales Tax usage Statute was intended to accomplish .

September 1, 2010 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

dale011 (anonymous) says...

A good start would be to get rid of the commissioner's county counsel and let the district attorney's office handle those duties. He left the office once then came back as assistant counsel and is now the counsel again - complete waste of taxpayer funds.

September 1, 2010 at 4:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )