Voters Could Always Decide on Earnings Taxes

I urge every voter in Missouri to vote NO on Proposition A on Tuesday.  I’ll explain why but first I want to examine the arguments in favor.

The slogan for passage is “let the voters decide.” Sounds logical enough, why shouldn’t we get to decide? From the pro-A website:

If Prop A passes in November, will the local earnings taxes automatically be eliminated in St. Louis and Kansas City?

Prop A does not automatically repeal those existing earnings taxes. It allows local voters to make that decision in local elections. If Missouri voters pass Prop A this November, the politicians will be required to allow local votes of the people on the existing earnings tax in St. Louis and Kansas City every five years, starting in 2011. These local votes will let voters decide for themselves if they want to continue their local earnings tax or gradually phase it out at the rate of one-tenth of one percent per year for 10 years.

Okay here is where I have  a problem with their wording.  “It allows local voters to make that decision in local elections” makes it sound like we must pass Prop A in order to have a local election on continuing to have an earnings tax or eliminate it and get the 1/3 of our annual revenue through other taxes. This is just not true!

Anyone with a better idea on how to fund St. Louis & Kansas City could use the initiative petition process to propose changes that would reduce/eliminate the earnings tax.

“1. Article V of the City Charter provides a procedure by which registered voters may propose an ordinance or an amendment to the City Charter and have it adopted by the voters, with the same effect as if it had been enacted by the Board of Aldermen and approved by the Mayor. This procedure consists of gathering the signatures of registered voters on an initiative petition.”

But the wealthy backer of Proposition A, Rex Sinquefield, knew if he got petitions on the ballot in St. Louis & Kansas City that spelled out how our sales taxes and property taxes would increase up to 50% to make up for the loss in revenue from the earnings taxes that he wouldn’t stand a chance.

“Their next sentence is “If Missouri voters pass Prop A this November, the politicians will be required to allow local votes of the people on the existing earnings tax in St. Louis and Kansas City every five years, starting in 2011” Clearly they are playing to the anti-politician sentiment we’ve been seeing nationally. Sounds like making the politicians do something, making them give us the right to reconsider the earnings tax every five years.  So?

The translation is this gives Rex Sinquefield numerous times to personally fund the campaigns to end the earnings tax in St. Louis & Kansas City.  It also means when either city goes to sell bonds to finance projects the bond rating will be higher causing a higher interest rate, potentially sidelining projects that might be able to be funded today.

Governments provide services and people pay taxes to fund those services.  There are many ways to fund governments.  St. Louis and Kansas City are both on the state line and have workers paying the tax that don’t live in the city.  Some live elsewhere in Missouri while others live in Illinois and Kanas, respectively.  Both cities provide services within each region that benefit those workers as well as their respective regions.

I have no love affair with the earnings tax and would gladly look at alternative funding concepts.  But until such alternates actually exist we don’t need to be trashing our bond rating and risking future projects. One-third of the St. Louis budget is a lot to try to make up elsewhere.

More info can be found at SayNoToA.org.

– Steve Patterson

Majority of Readers Support Proposition B

In the poll last week a majority of those that took the poll support the passage of Prop B while nearly 22% indicated additional regulation on puppy mills was a bad idea.

Q: Thoughts on Proposition B, on the Missouri ballot, also known as the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act:

1. A good idea, puppy mills are inhumane and tougher regulation is needed 118 [67.43%]
2. A bad idea, just more government regulation 38 [21.71%]
3. More regulation is needed, but this measure is excessive 13 [7.43%]
4. Other answer… 4 [2.29%]
5. Unsure/no opinion 2 [1.14%]

The four other answers were:

1. Don’t trust HSUS, MO has laws already
2. gimme all the puppies you can, they make good eats
3. Puppy mills are inhumane, but this is model legislation that will have no affect
4. Laws already exist. They need to be enforced.

I’m with the majority on this one, I’ll be voting yes on Prop B on Tuesday.

– Steve Patterson

Sixth Anniversary of UrbanReviewSTL.com

Today marks the sixth anniversary of this blog. I had no idea what I was doing at first, I just needed  a distraction from my Dad who was recovering from a heart attack on 10/1/2004. Many things have happened since:

• In early 2005 I ran for alderman in the 25th ward. I lost the race.
• After Katrina I bought a 49cc scooter.
• In 2006 my Mom passed away. Later that year I started the Master of Arts in Urban Planning & Real Estate Development (UPRED) program at Saint Louis University.
• In 2007 I went car-free and moved to a loft downtown.
• On New Year’s Day 2008 my Dad passed away.  A month later, to the day, I had a massive stroke from a hemorrhage on the right side of my brain.  I was hospitalized for three months.
• In 2009 I finished the coursework for my degree.

As my life has changed this blog has changed.  Where I live, where I go and how I get there plays a big role in what I write about.

Tomorrow, as I start year seven, I look forward to the next six years and beyond.  Thank you!

– Steve Patterson

Poll: What Do We Have That Will Help Our City Grow & Prosper?

At first I thought I’d go the negative route this week and ask what is it that will hold us back. But I quickly decided to flip it around and look at the positive first, saving the negative for a future poll.

Thus the poll question this week is: What do we have that will help the City of St. Louis to grow & prosper in the next 20-30 years is?

I’ve included a variety of answers, including that we won’t grown & prosper.  No doubt you will have other suggestions.  I’m optimistic that despite our leadership we will grow.  This is mainly due to national trends of increasing disinterest in suburbia among young adults, demographic changes, etc.

– Steve Patterson

Affordable Housing In Granite City, IL

Eight new homes were recently completed on infill lots to the east of downtown Granite City, IL.

The one-story house I toured was very basic, a good home for someone needing an accessible residence.  Granite City, IL still needs to work on sidewalks and curb ramps so that a disabled resident living in one of these houses could reach the grocery store, bank, post office, bus transfer station and so on.

The model Justine PETERSON is using for the houses is interesting, an affordable rent-to-buy arrangement.

• Those eligible must be below 80% of the median income.
• Rent is $595.
• The current value of the homes is $150,000; after the 15-year rental tenure, the tenant pays 60% of the market value of the home at that juncture.

– Steve Patterson