Editor,
I write to address our county government’s proposed ordinance to maintain the insurance tax increase, rather than keeping faith with Carter County voters and let the increase fade into the sunset, especially at a time when folks struggle to buy gas and groceries.
That last thing Carter County residents need is this increase being retained. What we need is integrity, i.e., promise-keeping, from our elected officials. And we demand it.
Several other issues present themselves here, however.
First and foremost, Carter County voters should note that in February 2016, Mr. Burton opposed the tax increase, at least according to a Feb. 26, 2016, article in the Ashland Daily Independent. Now, however, Mr. Burton reverses himself, asserting that keeping the tax in place is “an opportunity to be prosperous.”
I find Mr. Burton’s assertion preposterous and either woefully uniformed or blatantly disingenuous. Elevated tax levels never contribute to prosperity – that is basic economics, not to mention that is why taxes are called a “burden.”
Second, Mr. Huddle’s vague and amorphous hint that, if the tax stays in place, the county “could legitimately look at lowering the property tax rate in the future.” Is he serious? And does he seriously expect us to believe that?
How can we even pretend to believe that where, as here, a tax increase imposed to pay-down jail debt would now be extended for purposes other than by which the increase was sold to us in the first instance?
Third, if as Mr. Huddle suggested – that the county might not be able to pay its bills if the increase sunsets – the question that needs to be asked and answered is this:
If what Huddle suggests is verifiably true, then what have tax increase proceeds been used for these past year other than paying down jail debt?
Differently put, if the tax increase proceeds were used only for the purposes specified or intended, i.e., paying down jail debt, then sunsetting that tax increase when the jail is paid off amounts to the proverbial “zero sum game.”
So, either someone is confused; or someone is lying.
But, if any tax increase proceeds were used for purposes other than paying down jail debt, we’re owed a verifiable explanation as to why prior Fiscal Courts did not violate:
- First, Kentucky’s Constitution section 180, which outlaws using tax proceeds for purposes other than those specified in the ordinance that imposes the tax.
- Second, Kentucky State Statutes 68.100(1)-(3), which restates the constitution’s prohibitions; and
- Finally, Kentucky State Statute 68.990(3), which makes violating section 68.100(1) a criminal offense that can be prosecuted.
Fourth, more uses for tax money can always be found, sort of like Jesus said of the poor: they will be with you always. Consequently, “other good uses” seems a contemptible, if not illegal, justification to break promises made.
Fifth, we have right to demand integrity and accountability from our elected officials.
To that end, if our current Fiscal Court wants to fund road and other infrastructure improvement beyond what our fuels taxes presently pay for, let the Court propose (and perhaps seek voter approval for) a new tax instead of this contemptible and transparent sales job to keep a tax increase promised to soon fade away.
Respectfully,
/s/Scott L. Adkins
