Voters could see an initiative on the October ballot asking if they’d like the city’s mill rate to be capped at 11.5 mills per dollar of assessed value instead of 12.
Assembly Member Randy Wanamaker has announced a proposal that would have the city attorney draft an ordinance to do so. The Assembly will consider the question — whether to send the measure to the voters — at Wednesday’s Finance Committee meeting. It meets at 5:30 p.m. in Assembly Chambers.
Wanamaker said he’s got several reasons for proposing the idea to the voters.
“In the beginning of the year, the Assembly had a survey conducted on the budget,” Wanamaker said. “It was done by the McDowell Group. Over 70 percent of the people responding said they would prefer the city reduce costs for services rather than increase fees. In the budget process, the city has proposed a budget that increases the mill rate, increases fees and uses one-time money. ... I think that the Assembly needs to consider what it is the voters want. What do the citizens want? Are we tracking closely enough with them or are we not in touch with them the way they need to be?”
Wanamaker said that through the years, housing assessments have been going up.
“The Assembly has been proud of the fact it has kept the mill rate the same,” Wanamaker said. “People are paying more because their assessments keep going up, yet we keep the mill rate the same. Citizens are experiencing a double hit this year. I want to give the citizens a chance to say, we want to lower the cap. There would still enough room there for the Assembly to operate the city at current levels, and we definitely have incentive to find more ways be more efficient.”
Wanamaker said one of those incentives would be to grow businesses and the population of Juneau.
“If you have more people and more businesses paying taxes, the amount of taxes each of them needs to pay is less,” he said. “I think we need to broaden our tax base and lower the taxes we pay.”
Wanamaker said it’s likely the Assembly members will discuss the impact of lowering the rate — or even the necessity, but he said that’s not what the question ultimately is. The question is — should they let the voters decide?
“I’d be surprised if any Assembly member was opposed to letting voters decide the question,” Wanamaker said.
• Contact reporter Sarah Day at 523-2279 or at sarah.day@juneauempire.com.
Comments (12)
Add commentAs it should be,
Thank you Mr. Wanamaker, government is supposed to represent the people, it's too bad the Federal government cannot follow your advice.
I don't want to pay any more
I don't want to pay any more taxes any more than the next person. There is a cost to do business and costs keep going up.
I agree that there are programs that can be greatly reduced. I live in Juneau because of the services that are provided.
Do we need a new 7 million dollar library? Heck no. There are other goofy projects that are not neede but nice to have.
Let's have more responsible spending and leave the cap alone. It sounds like grandstanding to me.
List of services
I think it would be enlightening for the voters to get a list of the "Top 20" proposed service reductions, so we could get a better idea what "reduced services" actually means.
fireguy says no library. OK, I can go with that.
19 more to go.
Maybe an advisory vote on them?
YES!
Go Randy! You will no doubt have lots of support on this. Keep up the good work.
never works out
Tax caps have never been a solution. Sure they seem like a great idea at the time. Before long it forces a reassessment of properties to insure they are in facts assessed at 100% of market values (Alaska Statutes require 100% valuation.) Then everything is evaluated to see if fees are in line with cost. The results are fee based services will increase in cost. Or things that were not fee based become fee based. Some things may be eliminated or reduced temporarily from the budget. After a while taxpayers figure out they really did not want the item ended and cry to have it put back in the budget.
So dream on folks for the tax cap is not going to work any better this time than it has at other times.
Anchorage Daily News today
The Anchorage Assembly is using the unexpected state funding increment to LOWER the mill rate for property owners - against the mayor's wishes. And that is without the huge increase in assessed values that has now shocked Juneau property owners.
I predict the average voter
I predict the average voter would vote to cap the mill rate. It's more 'what's in it for me' without looking down the road to see the repercussions.
If the progressive, big government ideology is wholly ensconed in the residency, capping any government revenue is opening up a can of worms with lots of future bellyaching.
Are the Assembly and City up for that?
Wise move
Thanks Randy, our property tax is above national averages
A and P closing...
How many jobs are going to lost there? 100? Randy and the rest of the assembly have GOT to get real on what is coming at us with our wants and needs....this is a start in the right direction to keep us from pulling money from the rainy day funds and CIP projects to make the current budget.
We need jobs, affordable housing, and private INDUSTRY, not more government regulations and government jobs...our population in SE AK is shrinking and we don't need more fluff today that we can't afford tomorrow.
Hopefully people will start seeing the light and our "leaders" will take note too.
Wanamaker
for Mayor!!
@ Gumrunner
"Wanamaker for Mayor" - I think that might actually be the idea.
The mill rate is already capped at 12 mills. Reducing the cap to 11.5 mills might save the average home owner some money...
If we were anywhere near 12 mils now.
I believe this year we are closer to 9.5-10 mills.
Oh and that study Mr. Wanamaker is quoting? That was thrown out because it was deemed inconclusive.
The survey did, however, find that, "39 percent of 407 people surveyed by telephone wanted to reduce services, 30 percent wanted to see an increase in taxes or fees, 22 percent wanted both, 4 percent said neither, 5 percent didn’t know."
30% wanting an increase in taxes or fees is not the same thing as 70% wanting a decrease in taxes. That question wasn't asked. There is a fantastic book out there called, "How to Lie with Statistics" by Darrell Huff. I wonder if Mr. Wanamaker has read it.
Pre-green government,
I remember when there were jobs, a fishing fleet, a cold storage, a lumber mill down by the old city cafe. Now there are tourists who look at the trees (can't see the forest) government employees who live on paychecks filled by taxes paid by those who serve the tourists, nothing real, just the same old dollars going round and round untill they all disapear into government general revenues. Service people, serving service people, serving service people. Mr. Wanamaker at least has ideas to break out of that circle, "IF" big "IF" he is listened to.
And, gumrunner, thanks for your "positive"?? remark