Every once in a while a reasonable and solid piece of legislation surfaces in the state legislature that would actually improve the financial condition of Oil City and other similar communities.
The legislation is House Bill 2018, the Tax Exempt Property Municipal Assistance Act.
You’ve probably never heard of it. It certainly hasn’t made headlines anywhere, but it should.
The legislation would provide state funding through dedicating the 18 percent tax on wine and liquor sales – Believe it or not, this tax is the Johnstown Flood Tax – to provide assistance to communities where tax exempt properties account for more than 15 percent of market value of assessed property.
In Oil city, the percentage is a bit above 37 percent.
The Johnstown Flood Tax now goes into the state general fund, so it would have to be replaced either through cuts or other revenue sources. But the state has such opportunities, its cash-strapped cities and other municipalities with high percentages of tax exempt property do not.
The tax exempts are important to communities; they provide needed services and jobs. However, the also require municipal services even when almost always they are regional in scope.
If the tax exempts were taxable, Oil City would face no financial difficulties. We would have the money to sustain municipal services at current levels, and perhaps even improve them. We would have the money to address our deferred infrastructure needs, such as street paving.
And we can have the money for all of that through House Bill 2018.
What are your thoughts? Are you going to call your legislator and demand action?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Where does this legislation stand? The brief description here sounds reasonable. Perhaps you should bring it up at a council meeting, again, if you haven't already. What does Scott Hutchinson think about it?
Regarding the article in the Derrick and Ed Yard's struggle with blighted properties, isn't it true that the City used a large amount of CDBG funds (in excess of $200K) towards the new pool? I am fairly certain I read that in the paper.
If that is the case, you have to wonder if that was a wise decision. I'm sure the pool is great, although I haven't had time to go to it, probably like 98% of Oil City residents. It really does serve a small percentage of the population here. However, blighted, burned out, ugly properties affect all of us. Imagine having a burned out house next door to your property for several years. The new pool wouldn't mean much to you, but that house, and the others in town like it, severly affects the quality of life here.
John, you have to question if that was a wise use of funds. If the City had to wait 3-5 years for a new pool, we would have all survived. I just hope it is as popular next year and the weather for it is favorable.
I do remember Janet Gatesman saying they were projecting it to lose money - prior to opening it. That doesn't even deserve a comment it's so outlandish given our economy here. I'm happy 200-300 people in OC have a nice pool to go to, but please don't even think about raising my taxes to cover its losses - if that happens.
Post a Comment