Critique of Income Tax Proposal to be held at Library

[Ryan Patrick Demro]

[Jim O'Bryan]

Demro Offers Critique of Proposed Tax Increase

Lakewood City Councilman Ryan Patrick Demro, will give a critique of the income tax increase proposed by Mayor Tom George on Saturday, January 14, 2006 from 3:00-4:00pm in the Auditorium of the Lakewood Public Library at 15425 Detroit Avenue.

Councilman Demro describes the tax as, ?A public policy tool worthy of public debate and discussion.? Demro insists that an expanded dialog should occur before a final vote is taken by City Council on the issue. All residents and interested parties are welcome to attend.

###

Ryan

I would encourage you to place this into the calendar on the front page.

Thanks for holding this discussion.


.

[Bill Call]

Some questions I have about the income tax:

1. The Finance Directors letter to council regarding the budget mentions city employee raises of 3% to 5% in 2006. How much would a 5% raise cost each year?

2. How much would that raise cost the City in additional pension contributions?

3. How much would that raise cost the City in additional workers compensation and unemployment taxes?

4. The City has about 60 more employees than it did a few years ago. What steps are being taken to reduce employment levels beyond steps that have already been taken?

5. City employees used 47,742 sick hours in 2004. That is a 20% increase in sick time use since 1999. Are city employees that sick?

6. That level of sick use is almost ten sick days per year per employee. What steps are being taken to control sick time use?

7. What has happened to the money from issue 14?

8. The City receives about 1.5 million dollars per year in gas taxes from the State of Ohio for street repair. Is that money being spent on street repair?

9. Years ago the City started charging $20 annually per year for each car registration. That's about $800,000 per year. The promise was to use the money on street repair. Is that how the money is being used?

10. That 2.3 million dollars that is legally required to be spent on streets EACH YEAR would pave a lot of streets. If that money is not being spent on streets how can we believe future promises on dedicating money to street repair?

11. Every time the City needs more money it promises to use the money on streets. But the streets are not repaired. Why is that?

12. How much will health insurance premiums for city workers increase in 2005?

13. Can the City afford health insurance policies with no deductibles and no co-pays?

[Ryan Patrick Demro]

Thanks again to all of you who came out to the meeting. I will try to arrange another within the next two weeks.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Ryan

I am just curious as I did not make the meeting.

Are you saying the city does not need money?

From my discussions with everyone about this tax increase that is clearly aimed at me and some very close friends is - "The city needs money, and will need more in the future but we need better accountability" At no point does anyone say "The city does not need the money."

If this is the case isn't it prudent to back the tax increase, AND demand more accountability, than just say no to the new taxes.

Again I am not sure of where you stand, we have someone covering your event, but it has not hit editorial yet.

I also want to thank you for having the public meeting. It is through discussion that this city will move forward. I think the more discussion the faster it will move forward. Thanks for your efforts.


.

[Bill Call]

City income tax revenues have been flat for the last three years even as expenses have increased.

The City needs the money. However.....

The money raised by the proposed increase will cover raises promised to City employees until 2007. Then another tax increase will be required to fund yet more raises.

I am not willing to support a tax increase and just assume that for once the City will develop a management strategy. Show me the strategy and the plan and I will happily vote for an even larger tax increase.

[Suzanne Metelko]

Bill,

I agree. Many of us who are being labeled as tax opponents are merely asking for some level of accountability. And while we see the numbers we're not sure of the math. Budget hearings are going to be essential to this issue.

I'm confused as to why the city isn't proposing a bond issue. If this money is to be used for capital improvements isn't that the appropriate mechanism? It is my understanding that our credit is tapped out and our rating is suffering. Shouldn't that be a warning indicator?

And why is such a small segment of our population being impacted by this increase? Probably because that's the only way it will get passed.

If our credit is bad, if our debt is maxed out, I'm not opposed to making a tax investment if I know that we have a sound plan to maximize the investment for the future. That plan would include a clear, well thought out strategic plan and a tax increase that includes everyone in Lakewood. Community confidence in the elected leadership will be a load bearing plank in the strategic platfrom. For City Council to believe that they can put this issue on the May ballot and not be considered advocates is unrealistic. We elect our council representatives to read the data, meet with the appropriate staff, collect any addition information and make an informed determination in order to make a recommendation to us. If council votes to put this on the ballot, they are advocates for the tax and should be expected to sit in community living rooms every day until May to explain why this is the right thing to do. If they're not prepared to do that, then we should accept that we are a community that governs by referendum.

My family has supported every tax increase the city assets have thrown at us. We want this community to be strong and to succeed. However, we expect accountability and that shouldn't be such a big deal.