Here’s something you won’t want to hear: there’s nothing inherently wrong with property taxes.
Here’s another nasty fact: there’s nothing unfair about jacking up the tax on property that’s grown in value because of its desirable location.
One more unpleasant item: all government programs to relieve the property-tax burden are bogus.
The general tendency in Maine is to deal with property tax problems by sticking our fingers in our ears and chanting, “I can’t hear you.” Or doing something even stupider, such as Portland’s attempt to pass an unconstitutional rebate program (it shifted costs from homeowners to businesses), Lewiston’s refusal to implement a revaluation (which delays shifting costs from businesses to homeowners) and the Legislature’s various schemes (which shuffle the burden around among various classes of property owners).
Here’s the truth: the property tax is a reasonable tax because property owners demand costly municipal services.
More factuality: requiring those owners to pay based on the valuation of their property is fair because people with expensive land and houses tend to require more police, fire, and public-works spending than folks living in refrigerator cartons.
The straight goods: government programs — such as the circuit breaker, the homestead exemption, and Portland’s rebate — are frauds, because they require higher taxes in order to lower taxes.
Now let’s get to the part you’ll want to hear, but your elected leaders won’t: The problem with the property tax is not the way it’s assessed, but the stuff it has to pay for.
There’s a direct relationship between home ownership and such municipal budget items as fire protection, cop patrols, road repairs, and a few other services. But there’s no similar tie between buying a house and paying for schools, covering the cost of welfare, or financing county government.
If property taxes paid only for property-related services, everybody’s local tax bill would be less than half what it is now. People with views of the ocean off Cumberland Foreside would still pay more than people with views of the rain dripping off the roof of a Cumberland Farms. But that’s only fair. Also fair is that education, social services, and whatever it is we’re paying the county to do would have to be funded by broad-based taxes, such as the income tax or the sales tax, the former of which is based on your ability to pay and the latter on your propensity to spend.
Nobody in government at any level will listen to this sort of thing, because a fairer tax system means some people — let’s call them the rich — will pay more, while other people — code name: the poor — will pay less, while most people — that’s you, my little wombats — will end up paying about the same. There’s no political profit in that.
Better to pretend you’ve never heard about it.
A blurred sense of divine
When it comes to abortion, William Slavick is either complicated — or wishy-washy.
Slavick, the retired college professor from Portland who’s running as an independent candidate for the US Senate seat held by Republican Olympia Snowe, has a long history as an outspoken peace activist, supporter of liberal causes, and critic of the Catholic Church.
