BobGriggs.com

Regarding taxes, government should operate according to the following principles:

• Government should be limited to only those services that the people cannot provide for themselves, either individually or through the private sector;
• Government should provide those services in the most efficient and economical way possible;
• Government should take advantage of every opportunity to fund those services with non-tax revenue (user fees, etc.);
• Government should collect no more tax dollars from the people than is necessary to fund the provision of those services;
• When ad valorem (property) taxes are used to fund government services, equally-situated property owners must be treated equally.

The Albany (GA) city government asked its employees to cut back (read “reduce the cost of government”) in the midst of the economic downturn. They were so successful in reducing spending that the city realized a $720,000 surplus. City manager Al Lott decided that an appropriate use of the extra cash was Christmas bonuses for city employees (read “increase the cost of government”):

The bonuses will cost the city about $582,000 and if approved at next week’s regular meeting, will be paid out December 18th.

[Read the rest of this entry...]

A report by the International City/County Management Association indicates that the recession is forcing local governments to change how they do the public’s business:

Local government operations have changed permanently as a result of the recent financial crisis, according to a report from the Washington-based International City/County Management Association (ICMA). What that means, some city and county officials say, is that the "new normal" for governments will include more frugal budget choices and more partnerships between governments and the private sector.

Recession cuts may be permanent, city and county managers say – American City & County article

Gwinnett Daily Post reporter Camie Young touches briefly on an alarming revelation: the County Commission may not spend revenue from the recently-passed tax increase on police officers, fire stations and libraries after all. Instead, the county may apply the funds to the county’s growing accrued liabilities:

The $59 million Gwinnett County will collect next spring during a second billing of 2009 taxes could be set aside for employee pension liabilities, the county chief financial officer said.

Official: Use extra tax money for pensions

Last month, I described how the foundation for Gwinnett’s current financial woes was laid years ago through a series of bad decisions and flawed financial strategies. One series of actions by the County Commission is, in my opinion, most relevant to the current state of affairs.

For the past four years, the County Commission has not raised your property tax rate. Believe it or not, that was a bad thing.

For a couple of decades, Gwinnett benefited financially from being one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. Gwinnett’s explosive growth built fire stations, libraries, a state-of-the-art water reclamation facility and more. A fairly stable millage rate applied to a growing tax base funneled tax dollars into county coffers.

There is, however, a continuing cost associated with the operation of public facilities– staff, maintenance, utilities and the like. Around 2005, the annual increases in the cost of government began to outpace the growth in the Net Tax Digest. The county’s tax base was “maturing” as the inventory of developable land decreased.

This maturation was anticipated by the county’s financial forecasters, but ignored by the County Commission. That year, the Commission under Chairman Charles Bannister embarked on a flawed, politically-driven financial strategy that would hamstring the county’s efforts to respond to the looming crisis. [Read the rest of this entry...]

At SaveGwinnett.com, I have published the first of several articles on the Gwinnett County Commission’s proposed millage increase:

If you’re totally against a tax increase, you face an uphill battle. The reality is that there are already enough votes to pass the tax hike as proposed. Chairman Bannister has signaled that he will support it, as has Kevin Kenerly, who isn’t running for reelection. Shirley Lasseter is a sure second vote for Bannister; Bert Nasuti is also a lame duck but is open to reason. Only Mike Beaudreau is expected to oppose it.

There is, however, plenty about this proposal to criticize. As I will explain, the increase could be reduced by 32% and still fund the full restoration of service levels for this year.

SaveGwinnett.com » The Tax Increase: Myths and Misconceptions