Monday, November 17, 2008

Grove City Borough Council Considers Tax Shift

The Grove City Borough Council is considering a tax shift - raising the Local Services Tax (LST) to the state maximum of $52 and reducing property taxes by 1.5 mills. This shift would be budget neutral, meaning the taxation will be a one-to-one tradeoff.

The shift would remove a burden of taxation from property owners by reducing current borough millage a whopping 37.5%. The budget shortfall would be replaced by increasing the LST on those who work in the borough and earn more than $10,000 per year.

Reasoning: I believe the property tax to be an immoral tax. America is partly founded on the right to pursue private property ownership. Try not paying your taxes and see who really owns your land. If I can find a way to lower property tax, I'll do it. On top of that, consider that the Grove City Area School District will hike your taxes every chance they get. Borough residents can use some relief, especially those on fixed incomes. Besides, why should property owners be major funders of the tax system - a system that punishes them for working hard to simply own property?

Also, concerning the LST, consider that there are hundreds of people who enter the borough to work each day, who fully enjoy the services of the borough without having to pay for them. This tax simply recovers some of those funds to provide infrastructure and police/fire protection.

Ultimately, I'm not a fan of either tax, but given the choice between the two, I can understand the LST a lot more than the property tax.

2 comments:

Real said...

Rich:

The borough has clearly done a good job managing finances, and keeping the tax burden off seniors and the working class. Understanding that we don't yet have all the details, what is your opinion of the Grove City school district attempting to finance a new middle school (price tag: upwards of $24 million) during the worst economic times since the Great Depression? It certainly seems that the school district and the borough have different economic philosophies...

-J. Reeher

Rich Talbert said...

Tough economic times or not, it makes no sense to build a $24 million school when it isn't needed. The current middle school is quite adequate and is structurally sound.

Someone clearly wants his name on a bronze plaque, no matter what the cost to the taxpayer.

Would a new school be nice? Heck, yeah! But we can't afford to go buying new cars, houses, or schools simply because we want them. That's totally reckless spending - especially since they have to forcefully take that money from taxpayers.