Why would Jim Spore raise taxes?
By Brian Kirwin | Thursday, April 1st, 2010 | Policy, PoliticsIt’s almost too stupid.
Virginia Beach’s budget is about $1,800,000,000. City Manager Jim Spore rolls out tax increases on real estate, personal property and, of course, cigarettes (per the Virginian-Pilot). It’s tone-deaf of mammoth proportions, but he’s not elected. He’s not expected to care, but the Mayor Will Cotton-pickin’ Sessoms has been pushing for higher taxes for a while now. Sessoms ran as a Republican and then endorsed Democrat Jody Wagner for Lieutenant Governor while the rest of Virginia laughed and easily re-elected Bill Bolling. How many strikes is the GOP giving Sessoms?
Here’s where it gets really stupid.
The tax increases only add $17.8 million to a 1.8 billion dollar budget. One Percent of the budget? Spore couldn’t find enough offsets and cuts to cut an additional One Percent to avoid raising taxes in a recession?
And don’t give me the old “we’ve cut to the bone, we’re lean, we’re mean” garbage. Spore found $63,000 to underwrite his recent employee’s organization to find out “how much residents are willing to pay for the (transportation) improvements.” (story here)
Ain’t that cozy? The budget is so tight that Spore wants to raise taxes, but hands 63K to his old buddy to “pay for speakers.” Hmmm, how do you find out what people want by hiring speakers? Shouldn’t they hire listeners?
“Under Spore’s budget, 200 positions would also be cut, half of which are vacant. But Beach officials don’t anticipate layoffs, as employees whose jobs are eliminated would be transferred to open positions.” (VP)
That doesn’t save money. If you eliminate 100 vacant positions that you aren’t paying anyone for today, you aren’t paying any less tomorrow. And for the 100 you are paying, if they all stay employed but with different jobs, you still aren’t paying any less tomorrow. How is that saving money???
Here’s the real test for stupid. In an election year during a recession, what genius thinks elected officials, especially those facing the voters in mere months, are going to gamble their political futures on a tax increase that amounts to less than one percent of the budget?
Maybe Spore and Sessoms are used to the days when elections were in May and the budget vote was after Election Day, and not before it.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
16 Responses to "Why would Jim Spore raise taxes?"
Once again, Brian reveals the difference between governance and running for office. Of course Brian would advocate cut, cut, and cut some more. He must have advised John Moss, the VBTA candidate for Mayor who got less than 16% of the vote. But it is local government where the need for services meets the requirement for taxes most directly, and Spore showed that by cutting $80,000,000 from this year’s budget, he knows how to cut, yet unlike the Governor, he preserved essential services and jobs by increasing tax rates (not taxes paid). Now contrast that with the Governor, who claimed to be the jobs governor, but who knew he would be responsible for the loss of 35,000 jobs?
Let Jim Spore show the public the furlough and layoff options for city employees. Until the public sees they were unworkable, Spore won’t sell the tax increase.
As much as I dislike Spore, Brian is right. Spore isn’t elected. It is council that is responsible for Spore’s actions. It is council that should be held accountable on election day. Bill DeSteph is the only person on council actually looking out for the interests of taxpayers.
Mike Barrett can say what he likes about John Moss only getting 16% spliting the vote between a powerful incumbent mayor, Scott Taylor, and a Will Sessoms that was heavily financed by special interests in construction etc.
The voters, already upset with Oberndorf’s tax and spend behavior saw Sessoms as the Republican with assets to best defeat Oberndorf. In this context, 16% really isn’t as bad as it sounds. It only shows how badly the Oberndorf policies were percieved by the voters.
Furloughs/hour reductions stink. And it wouldn’t have been even needed if there wasn’t irresponsible spending and growth. It didn’t take a genius to figure out that as housing prices continued to skyrocket(along with associated TAXES), that if local wages didn’t follow suit that there would be a BIG problem.
For some reason, Spore and council seemed to have no hesitation in spending money that really wasn’t there. Now the city has to pay for it!
I do not believe there is a need for VB to raise taxes. There still has not be a solid effort to cut costs. I know of millions to be cut in operations and organizational layers. I’d support a tax increase if it was needed but it is not. The budget proposal is Jim Spore’s to make but the City Council has the final budget vote. Then it becomes their issue and they become accountable to the taxpayers and voters.
My fellow VB citizens elected representatives have an opportunity to explain why we are closer to $200 million over budget. Some services should be put up for bid by private enterprises such as trash collection and grounds maintenance. There is a state of denial in this city that the volunteer rescue squads save millions of dollars but behind the facade defended by Mayor Sessoms there is tremendous replication of services overlapping in order to respond to the call for help while waiting for one of the 30 or so ambulances that might be available depending on whether there are enough manned up units.
If our city government was independently bench marked with city supervisor and council oversight I am sure the reports would be perky and bouncy, happy and joyful when compared to other cities. But we are in a recession and I guess this is a great opportunity to drive out tax negative households and make way for future tax positive households.. Anyone willing to wager a bet? If the city had to place a photo copy of each and every expense paid by check or wire online along with an explanation of the need for the expense and whom authorized it, you people would be furious..
Hire some retired CEO and CFO talent from private industry (there is plenty of it right here in VB) and permit their numbers people to review the books.. replication, waste and gross inefficiency would be exposed. $200 million with an M is a conservative estimate for what could easily be culled from the budget during these hard times and yes some entitlements would be affected.
Yes James, there is a long line of so called experts who have opined that millions of dollars could be cut. One representative of the VBTA boasted a few years ago at a council meeting that he could easily cut $50 M, but was surprised when Council asked him to return with a list. He never showed up, because it is always easier to boast than to perform. Fact is, this year the Manager cut $80,000,000, and those cuts will have an effect on services. The Manager has already instituted performance management and rewards for making production improvements. Of course, today the mob psychology is simply to cut indiscriminately, but the manager used a deft touch, and most citizens will pay much less in taxes this year than last year. Further, necessary strategic investments that will reduce tax rates are still included in the budget.
Yeah, he cut 100 jobs that no one had and moved another 100 people into other jobs. What a slash!
So Brian, when the Manager does the right thing, cuts $80.3 dollars from the total of last year’s budget, cuts 200 positions, it is not enough for you? Of course, it is never enough, unless or course, you are advocating for programs or facilities that you support. Like Reid, you use the programs and services, yet criticize the cost. What else is new? Some would call that hypocrisy. So what level of service is low enough for you?
I’m not using the $63,000 he handed to his buddy to pay for speakers at “community conversations”
Mike: My plans can save millions in taxes and bring in eight to ten million more in new money but “the manager” doesn’t want it… LOL… That is why I know this budget is BS.
If there really was a budget crisis, he’d put my plan inplace today! Raising taxes is just his way and THE VB REPUBLICAN WAY(VB CITY COUNCIL IS STACKED WITH GOP MEMBERS!!!) to fund your construction projects.
Doing the right thing is only in your mind. And please do not give the cut public safety and school speech as I’ve heard it a hundred times… Go ahead and cut it(I dare you) and your city council buddies will be out of a job after the coming election.
I think that cutting $80.3 million dollars, or 4.5% from current levels of spending shows significant commitment to keeping taxes low. Further, the rate increase still means most citizens will have an actual tax decrease. I look forward to the budget hearings that will gauge whether citizens want to stop the decline in service levels, or support further cuts. I applaud the council for past investments that have kept our tax rate the lowest or among the lowest in the region. That should continue because it benefits employees, tax payers, and our citizens. Short term savings that cost us long term benefit are unwise.
As I read the newspaper this morning, it would seem that city council is not going to support raising taxes but it is a long way to the budget vote occurs…
Yes, you are right and it certainly seems odd that members would announce their decision before they have heard from the citizens. After all, there are $80.3 M of cuts in the proposed budget, and these service reductions will hurt citizens who need and want these services. I don’t think we should use reserves this year, as next year may be challenging as well. Of course the easy thing to do is to bow to the mob psychology that seems to have risen to the top this year, but I hope Council will listen and deliberate before they act.
I’d support an increase if it was really needed but frankly as an insider, I know of many things that still waste dollars and have not even been considered before a tax increase was proposed.
Cut first than increase is how we do it in my business and home life. VB should be no different.
Well William, your plan has it’s draw backs as well. An opponent could label your plan as a government takeover of the EMS system, which would of course be an unfair characterization, but that is the result of this mob psychology that has enveloped public discussion of important issues. My concern is with the ticking time bomb represented by unfunded liabilities for employee health care, retirement, and disability payments. This year, another way to fund the system is to ask employees to contribute 1% of the 5% match to VRS, and to set a policy that contribution will increase 1% per year until the 5% contribution level is met. Afterall, most public sector jobs now pay more than their private counter parts, and receive higher benefit levels as well, so this is the time to re-establish balance in the system.
Mike: Lets take a look around at the 437,000 residents of this city: they are (by a vast majority) military, civil servants and public employees. None of which currently contributes to their own retirement accounts. They take low pay in return for a low payout stable retirement. And many of those same employees are private sector workers too in their second or third jobs and the businesses they own and operate.
So lets look at your contrived contribution push… What are you pushing for? Are you now pushing for the military or military retires to contribute up to 5% each? Answer: No.
Are you now pushing for federal civil servants and retires to pay in up to 5%? Answer: No
So now you want the city and school employees to fund up to 5% each year… Why single them out when they haven’t event had a pay raise in 3 years? The answer: You need to get that funding off the taxpayers and onto the backs of employees. It sounds great but the taxpayers are never going to see a dime of that money.
You want them to contribute to VRS so they contribute but it is really about funding your construction projects. Your contribution excuse is a Red Herring and nothing more. You need tens of millions in more funding and will use any excuse or reason to free up local funds to substidize(sp?) your public/private, so called tax generating and investment building construction…. LOL
Please do not tell me “I’m wrong” as anyone can see where you are coming from. I’m not stupid and I know what your motive is.
Leave your response