Final Swing: To accept the LOST or Say "No" to an extra 1% in Cedar Rapids?

We have choices, very important choices locally on March 3Rd and beyond...

There is no fast cure to our Flood Recovery and to our economic crisis that we are faced with today. We have decisions to make and we have options to pursue. Is a five year and three month period a good time frame for the LOST, when other decisions and funding sources will be needed over the next five years and beyond?

"Approve tax for the future of our city" The Gazette headline reads above Gary Hinzman's guest column. We didn't notice an opposing guest column today, but we did notice final arguments in the Election Letters both pro and con for the 1% Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) for the City of Cedar Rapids and Linn County for the upcoming March 3Rd vote.

The Gazette calls the March 3Rd vote "A referendum on ourselves" in The Gazette's Editorial in support for the tax. Has The Gazette been fair and balanced on this issue? With the timing of the Hinzman guest column and the paper's own pro-stance today, where's the other side represented in today's overall editorials?

By the way, the City of Cedar Rapids certainly has more options on the table than one vote on March 3Rd? Unlike the City of Iowa City, the City of Cedar Rapids rushed to get the ballot written and thrown together to make the deadline to hold a March 3Rd vote.

The City of Iowa City decided to take it's time and get it ballot language written for a May 5Th vote. While Flood Recovery is part of the City of Iowa City vote, they are also using the 1% local option sales tax for areas not impacted by the Flood of 2008.

Let's scan the Today's Letters...

"The negative attitude about government no help" - Dale Todd's headline to his letter to the editor today. Mr. Todd is co-chair for the Pro-tax group.

Alan Witt, Chairman of the Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, in his letter today talks about Cedar Rapids, but when he talks about how much "the tax will raise an estimated $29 million in annual support and $145 million over its five-year life span," he's talking about Linn County.

The $145 million figure is not all for Flood Recovery. Actually, the Gazette used a figure of $17 million per year in their Editorial today, which would be closer to $85 million, in what The Gazette calls "dedicated to making a major dent in the $200 million-plus housing problem."

By the way, why is the sales tax the only way to "show our local and federal funding sources that we as Cedar Rapidians are willing to support and lift each other up?" A local taxpayer and flood victim suggested yesterday, why is raising taxes the only option to show we have a "skin" in the game?

The "skin" in the game reference has been promoted heavily by Gary Ficken, the other co-chair of the Pro-tax group and recently won support from another group in Linn County. "Results of the ballot are in: the LCDCC will endorse the Local Option Sales Tax."

Further, housing isn't the only problem. The Economy of Cedar Rapids is a major problem. Not just due to the flood, which the Hinzman article points out, "the U.S. Chamber of Commerce states that upward of 40 percent of small businesses will fail in the four years after experiencing a disaster," but the Economy in general, as this story from CNBC points out about current and upcoming Tax Policy.

It's interesting to see the local Chamber of Commerce lobbying voters to pass the 1% local option sales tax in Cedar Rapids. In most communities, you don't see local chambers taking an active stance. When you read the ballot language, it's even a little more surprising.

Why five years, and three months for the tax?

Paul T. Larson of Cedar Rapids brings it up in his letter headlined "Give up option tax in season of Lent." He suggests "be sure to read thoroughly the vague and broadly defined ballot language in Cedar Rapids, before casting your vote."

The letter by Bruce Johnson of Cedar Rapids is headlined "Leaders need to give specifics on money use" and points to both the Cedar Rapids City Council and Linn County Board of Supervisors lacking in "SPECIFICS" and in "VISION" in the ballot.

If our "elected leaders" do not well define what is to be done in
advance,
how can we, as taxpayers, benchmark if our money is being spent
wisely?- Bruce Johnson - Cedar Rapids

The letter by Russ Madden of Cedar Rapids is headlined "Voting on tax doesn't make forced charity OK" as he questions "the (good) ends do not justify the (bad) means." Madden's comments place a focus ends justifying the means approach from the Pro-tax group. Further, the City Council hired a City Manager who favors the Carver governance model, which is a ends process for organizational purpose. How much does Carver figure into our process taken at the local level currently, under our new form of government, here in Cedar Rapids?

Other headlines from those asking for the LOST to be voted "NO" -

"Money from sales tax will come to late to help" - Diane McLain - Cedar Rapids headline on her letter against the LOST. "We absolutely must help flood victims, but they need help now." McLain is concerned that "some of them could have to wait up to six years to obtain flood relief from such a tax."

"All money from sales tax should be for recovery" and "Only flood victims should benefit from tax"... similar thoughts in headlines from the letters from Cedar Rapids residents Rob Sandquist and Ron Nezerka, respectively. Both appear to feel all residents of Linn County should support Flood Recovery. Nezerka said "money that should be used only by and for flood victims throughout the county and not for any other purpose other than possibly property tax relief to replace lost dollars because of the flood."

If the City of Cedar Rapids had not placed a measure on the ballot, other cities would not be discussing other uses. "Sales tax would fund Linn County roads," as this story tells us. The City of Cedar Rapids rushed to get a ballot together for March 3Rd, which forced others in Linn County to rush as well.

"Sales tax money will be mishandled; vote no" - Robert Scott of Cedar Rapids as the headline on his letter against the LOST.

"Sales tax won't solve C.R.'s red-tape problems" - Bryon Flint of Cedar Rapids as the headline on his letter as he closes with "I'm voting no on the local-option tax."

"Sales tax money will fund too many pet projects" - David Sheets of Toddville as the headline of his letter against the LOST. "This lack of public control over the manner in which sales tax revenues are spent makes it easy to argue, when the tax is set to sunset, for the tax to be extended, as by then the original project is likely complete and some other project has come to depend on the sales tax money."

"Increasing tax will drive more to shop online" - Richard Greer of Cedar Rapids as the headline of his letter suggests as he points out "I know people are supposed to voluntarily pay the sales tax but I'm also sure many do not. That gives the Internet a significant advantage over local retailers."

I find it ironic how the city governance chose to "wait and see" concerning
flood relief. However, last fall, as I was rebuilding my home it made the
decision to dispatch property tax assessors. When confronted, I was told
my valuation would go down. Guess what? It went the other way,
as did all of my neighbors. - Gary Wilhelm -Cedar Rapids

"We can't afford more taxation, lies" - Gary Wilhelm of Cedar Rapids the headline of his letter and he closes with "please vote no, I can't afford any more taxation or lies."

In closing, we began under this new form of government with around a $297 million annual city budget. Today, it is roughly $370 million annually and the City of Cedar Rapids is asking for $17 million more for what is on the ballot March 3Rd. The Gazette states "this debate boils up to three words for Cedar Rapids: money, measure and message."

The money is about the priorities for our $370 million budget. As Tim Pugh from the Cedar Rapids Tea Party has pointed out, why not start with a 5% cut in our current budget and reallocate that portion of the money (roughly $18 million annually) towards what the City Council members unanimously and specifically committed 90 percent of all the option tax revenues for?

Since the Flood of 2008, what cost saving move has the City of Cedar Rapids undertaken? We hear about government furloughs across the country, even within the State of Iowa. We hear about salaries and benefits being frozen. But, what is going on in Cedar Rapids? Public opinion for the vote.

The Gazette closed with the following statement: "target, temporary sales tax boost is one Cedar Rapids simply can't afford to reject during this extraordinary time." Sadly, the ballot isn't very targeted in the ballot language and 63 months isn't viewed as temporary, in light of the current economic conditions in the State of Iowa and in the eyes of many local taxpayers.

We should vote NO on March 3Rd. Then, we should get everyone back at the table and truly get the "money, measure and message" right. Options exist for a August 4Th and November 3Rd ballot measures, as well.

Still have questions? What are they? Q&A from The Gazette.

peace