Fire Station

[Evan & Nancy Holmes <ncmholmes@moscow.com>]

Dear readers and visionaries;

All the questions about the fire station have reinforced my long standing
conviction that this community needs additional methods for, and better
results from, information flow between the government (elected) and the
citizens.

   I believe the $4.50 tax per $100,000 of property value is a per month
estimate. Some of your discussions are treating it as a yearly amount. Also
keep in mind that this is calculated using the homeowners exemption (50% of
the first $100K value of property improvements) so that the $4.50 is more
realistically the levy against each $50K of improvements. Property with
$150K worth of improvements would likely pay twice the amount of new tax as
property with $100K.
   As an interesting sidenote the school district would also like a little
bit more money. In a Daily News article an explanation of this attributed
to Mike Curley showed that this new levy would really not be an increase
when calculated in terms of percentage of property valuation since levy
amounts are not adjusted for inflation and our supplemental school levy
rates were set nearly ten years ago. Very true and unusually insightful.
   I have a counterpoint. The homeowner exemption is also not adjusted for
inflation although property valuation is periodically adjusted to conform
to market fluctuations. As a result, an increasing percentage of the tax
burden slowly, invisibly, shifts to homeowners, especially those with
homes/improvements at the modest end of the scale. If the homeowner
exemption was pushed upwards to regain losses to cost-of-living, just like
the school's operating levy, then this would be more easily described as an
equitable inflation adjustment. I would like to begin work/dialogue on a
needed adjustment to the homeowner exemption.
   Now, back to the fire station. A significant point has not been raised
here. We are currently paying off a supplemental levy for fire equipment
approved by the voters years ago. I believe that bond is almost paid off.
So the percentage of our total tax committment that would go to fire
suppression activities won't really change as much as you think over the
next ten years. This seems like good long term tax management to me, even
if it happened accidentally.
   Paying in advance, instead of borrowing money. might sound like a good
idea until you look at the bids that come in when municipal bonds are let.
The rates are often quite low. You would probably come out slightly ahead
(especially in the latter years) to invest the money yourself in CDs and
pay the incremental taxes that result from the bond (fixed rate for ten
years).
   Along these lines, however, I think it is worth entertaining the idea of
residents loaning money to the fire department directly. Perhaps there are
enough people out there who would be satisfied with a 3% return, knowing
that the capital was going to a benefit a local need. I would like to see
something like this happen for the public library system.
   I'm glad to see so many thoughts about this issue. Special thanks to
Council member Steve Busch for raising his head up early and trying to
clear up some of the concerns.

					- Evan Holmes