| ||||||||||
 
Dr. Ronald P. Rogers CHIROPRACTOR Support for your body's natural healing capabilities 270-384-5554 Click here for details 
  
Columbia Gas Dept. GAS LEAK or GAS SMELL Contact Numbers 24 hrs/ 365 days 270-384-2006 or 9-1-1 Call before you dig 
Visit ColumbiaMagazine's Directory of Churches Addresses, times, phone numbers and more for churches in Adair County Find Great Stuff in ColumbiaMagazine's Classified Ads Antiques, Help Wanted, Autos, Real Estate, Legal Notices, More... 
|
Steve Warren: Proposed payroll tax not best approach ' . . . I want to see economic development in our area. I want to see our area grow. I want to see the people of our county and city given the opportunities to increase their quality of life and earn better wages. I want to see our community beautified and people taking a growing pride in living here. I do not believe that this payroll (occupational license) tax is the means to accomplish this.' - STEVE WARREN To read the proposed payroll tax ordinance: Occupational License Tax Ordinance PDF Click on headline for complete commentary By Steve Warren Personal commentary I appreciate what was said in the article that Ben Arnold posted last week concerning his views for economical development. I believe that a majority of the people in our area want to see opportunity expand in our county and city. I do not believe that the present approach is the best approach. Can't tax your way to prosperity There is an old saying in politics, "You can't tax your way to Prosperity." I believe that this is true. If the proposed tax goes through the projected increase in Tax Revenue for the City of Columbia is eight hundred thousand to one million dollars. Let's consider what this might mean. Payroll tax will take $800K to one million dollars from roughly 3,000 people If 800K to 1 Million dollars are taken from the roughly 3000 people who will suffer the implementation of this tax then that money will not be available to be spent at local stores. This means that 800K to 1 Million dollars will be taken out of the homes of local citizens and be placed in the hands of local government. I believe that the best scenario is for this money to be spent within the community by the people who work hard to earn it. Thirty percent of the funds are designated for economic development. That is 240K to 300K depending on actual new taxes collected. This is a lot of money spend and there should be come realistic expectation for a return on that money. Personally, I am not satisfied with the results of previous monies that were spent on economic development. How many new jobs have been brought to the area and how many have been lost? Parks should come when we have a surplus Twenty percent of the projected new tax revenue is delegated for parks and recreation. This is 160K to 200K. I like nice parks. I have been fortunate enough to live in areas that have nice parks. They are an asset to the community. However, during a period of hard economic times, such things are a luxury and not a necessity. How much better to make plans for such things, then be ready to carry out those plans when we enjoy a surplus rather than looking to raise taxes to add new parks. And has cost of maintenance for parks been considered? Another consideration is the added costs of maintaining new parks. Can we afford to keep up additional parks when they don't generate revenue? The old "Christian Life Center" is a nice facility but I'm sure that it costs many thousands of dollars per year to maintain. Does the rent charged for use of the facility pay the expenses of it's upkeep? Is this the time to add more parks and recreation facilities if there is no plan to make them pay for the cost of maintenance? I do like parks but not if we cannot afford them. A former local resident once made the wise observation, "Don't ever start something that you don't plan to keep up." The more that we build the more we have to keep up and the more the cost of maintenance. Only 10 percent for building up raining day fund, rest for City Government Ten percent of the projected new tax revenue is delegated for building up the rainy day fund. If we add this to the other areas noted and the corresponding percentage of the new tax we come up to sixty percent or 480K to 600K dollars. This leaves forty percent which will be applied to running the City Government. This forty percent amounts to 320K to 400K dollars. Surely there can be budget items that are trimmed to save this amount of money within the present tax structure. City has cut? Why aren't specifics made public Over the last six years many families in our county have had to cut their personal budges to the point that it hurts. I'd like to have an accounting of how the City of Columbia has done the same. It is only fair that those who are asked to shoulder a new tax be fully informed of ALL that has been done to manage the City through tightening up the City Budget. If all are benefitting, why aren't all asked to pay the tax My final observation concerns the purpose behind the new tax. The primary push seems to be that the community will benefit. As I consider this I understand that the goal is to firstly see the residents of the City benefit and secondly the resident's of the county benefit (County residents will bear the bulk of the new tax burden). If this new tax is needed and is to benefit all of the residents of Columbia and Adair County why are roughly 3000 people being asked to pay the tax? Roughly 500 residents of Columbia will be taxed but ALL of the residents of Columbia will benefit. Of the 2500 people who will be taxed outside the City we can estimate that 2000 or more County residents will bear the burden of the Tax. This is only a small percentage of the population of Adair county. Why are so few people being asked to pay a tax that we are told will benefit everyone? Wants to see economic development I will end by reinforcing the point that I want to see economic development in our area. I want to see our area grow. I want to see the people of our county and city given the opportunities to increase their quality of life and earn better wages. I want to see our community beautified and people taking a growing pride in living here. I do not believe that this payroll (occupational license) tax is the means to accomplish this. If we are to move forward, we need to work together If we are to move forward as a community the City and County will need to work together. If we are to move forward as a community we will need a workable plan that is comprehensive and removes obstacles. We will need to be united as city and county to promote private enterprise, entrepreneurship and involve the voice of all of our people. Thank you, Steve Warren --Steve Warren This story was posted on 2014-09-15 06:32:21
Printable: this page is now automatically formatted for printing.
Have comments or corrections for this story? Use our contact form and let us know. More articles from topic News:
Virtuous Woman's Conference, Sep 20, 2014, at New Life Wrong dog from groomer: says husband/father oughta known ACSO arrests Ross Cemetery Road property owner for MJ grow Seed and flower exchange at Trabue House Gradyville Baptist Church community service starts Sep 20, 2014 Kentucky Afield Outdoors: New teal-only season Tommy Melson says there is a network bias against Melson Ridge LWC Men's Soccer prevails, 2-1, at Tennessee Wesleyan Adair Heritage Association re-elects officers at annual meeting Larry Smith and the Big Dawg win Moon & Stars award View even more articles in topic News |
 
115 Jamestown St. Columbia, KY. 270-384-2496 
  
   
 Provided by the Adair Co Fiscal Court and the Adair Co. Emergency Mgt. Agency 
|
||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
Quick Links to Popular Features
Looking for a story or picture? Try our Photo Archive or our Stories Archive for all the information that's appeared on ColumbiaMagazine.com. | ||||||||||
|
Contact us: Columbia Magazine and columbiamagazine.com are published by Linda Waggener and Pen Waggener, PO Box 906, Columbia, KY 42728. Please use our contact page, or send questions about technical issues with this site to webmaster@columbiamagazine.com. All logos and trademarks used on this site are property of their respective owners. All comments remain the property and responsibility of their posters, all articles and photos remain the property of their creators, and all the rest is copyright 1995-Present by Columbia Magazine. Privacy policy: use of this site requires no sharing of information. Voluntarily shared information may be published and made available to the public on this site and/or stored electronically. Anonymous submissions will be subject to additional verification. Cookies are not required to use our site. However, if you have cookies enabled in your web browser, some of our advertisers may use cookies for interest-based advertising across multiple domains. For more information about third-party advertising, visit the NAI web privacy site.
| ||||||||||
