1. Local Government can choose to not increase the property tax levy and can instead increase income taxes. If this option is chosen then the income tax would increase every year.
2. Local Government can increase local income taxes up to 1% and use 100% of this revenue to lower property taxes.
3. If a Local Governmental unit does both #1 and #2 above then they will be allowed to levy an additional local income tax of .25% to be used for Public Safety.
Now Mike gives his opinion in the post linked above and while I agree w/ most of his thoughts I thought I'd share my own. Options 1 & 3 should simply not be considered. They are, by definition, not revenue neutral and would amount to a tax increase which I am strongly against. I think our local government has enough money to operate and needs to find ways to create new revenue through economic growth and not increased taxation (which tends to stifle economic growth).
Option 2 has a few different facets to it and if the council were to adopt it then they would have to decide who gets the property tax reduction:
members would also decide whether the property tax break would go only to principal homes; to homes and rental property; or to all property, including that of business.
While option 2 may sound revenue neutral and thus a real possibility let me remind readers that voting for a new tax in hopes of reducing another tax always results in increased taxes. Keep this in mind during future council meetings when you hear the various members tell you how much this will benefit you. It won't. Ultimately it will give local government more money to spend which means you will have less to spend.
If they want to cap property taxes at a level lower than 2% (as Mike suggests) before instituting any of the above changes then maybe I'll listen. However, I seriously doubt they will consider such a move and thus we should not support ANY of the changes that will be discussed by the council...