A question frequently asked of candidates is: What is your position on taxes? Taxes are a concern of many residents and businesses, and it has become almost routine to appeal to voters by promising to reduce taxes or at least to never raise them. There should be no need to raise taxes at this time given the recent $1.9 million increase in the local option sales tax allocation for the city.
In discussing what is an appropriate level of taxation for the City of Johns Creek, we should first acknowledge two simple truths. First, the quality and scope of services we enjoy are directly related to what we are willing to spend, and second, we cannot expect others to pay for the services from which we benefit. Further, in the context of Johns Creek, we should understand that the city's revenues come one-third from property taxes, one-third from sales taxes, and one-third from franchise fees, business permits, fines, etc.
When an elected official, or candidate, says he or she has not raised or will not raise taxes, does this mean sales taxes, property taxes, or the many miscellaneous "fees"? Adjusting sales taxes requires a vote by the people, and the recent completion of the 2010 Census revision makes it unlikely that city sales tax revenues will be modified. Property taxes are subject to a millage cap in Johns Creek, but it should be noted that under the sponsorship of the current members of City Council, the city charter was revised this year to make it easier to increase that cap. My position is that a citywide vote to revise that cap should only be held during a Presidential or statewide election in November when voter turnout is highest.
Fees are often seen by our elected officials and candidates as not subject to the promises to hold the line on taxes. We have seen any number of fees imposed in Johns Creek as a way to raise revenues without raising taxes. Most recently we have seen security alarm fees and waste hauler fees imposed in our city. When the city was first formed our council members, who were also on the council back then, imposed franchise fees on electricity, gas, cable, and telephone providers equivalent to raising property taxes by 25%. My view is that we should not discourage businesses by treating them as "cash cows" to be squeezed endlessly with fees, and that we should avoid using broad-based, widely applicable fees, as a veil for taxes.
Finally, bonding, or selling city municipal bonds, has often been discussed by members of City Council as a way to increase the amount of money the city has available to spend in the near-term without increasing taxes. However, bonds, just like a home mortgage, are not a source of revenue. They are a loan against future revenues of the city to allow us to do something now at the cost of not being able to do something later. We must be very careful in the use of bonds, because they come with interest costs, which reduce the total amount of money we have available to spend for the benefit of the city.
