Greed Incorporated

[XLFD]

(A special thank you to Joe Law for doing some research on this) ; )

 

The Ludington City Council is posed to enact six ordinances setting increased millage rates and creating tax levies for those increases on Monday July 12, 2010 at 6:30 P.M..  According to the city clerk, City Manager John Shay explained that there is a $6.5 million tax decrease in the taxable value from 2009 to 2010 due to the declining property values.  The rate increases are necessary so that the City will lose less tax money.

 

            Citizens of Ludington lost a lot of money due to their property values going down.  The ethical thing for the government of Ludington is to accept that the drop of millage rates the state mandates in such a case (particularly when property values are assessed higher than the rate of inflation) should be observed.   There are reasons why these tax rates are being reset by law, and to counteract these six proposed ordinances here are six laws the state has passed to keep local governments from reaching too deep in the pocketbooks of their taxpayers without their consent:

 

THE GENERAL PROPERTY TAX ACT  MCL211.34d (6) The number of mills permitted to be levied in a tax year is limited as provided in this section pursuant to section 31 of article IX of the state constitution of 1963. A unit of local government shall not levy a tax rate greater than the rate determined by reducing its maximum rate or rates authorized by law or charter by a millage reduction fraction as provided in this section without voter approval.

 

STATE CONSTITUTION OF MICHIGAN  Sec. 31. Units of Local Government are hereby prohibited from levying any tax not authorized by law or charter when this section is ratified or from increasing the rate of an existing tax above that rate authorized by law or charter when this section is ratified, without the approval of a majority of the qualified electors of that unit of Local Government voting thereon.

 

THE GENERAL PROPERTY TAX ACT   MCL 211.107a  No city shall have power to increase the rate of taxation now fixed by law, unless the authority to do so shall be given by a majority of the electors of said city voting at the election at which said proposition shall be submitted…

 

THE GENERAL PROPERTY TAX ACT   MCL 211.24f  If a taxing unit submits a proposal on the question of authorizing the issuance of bonds, imposing a new millage, or increasing or renewing an existing millage, except an ad valorem special assessment millage for police or fire protection under 1951 PA 33, MCL 41.801 to 41.813, the ballot shall fully disclose each local unit of government to which the revenue from that millage will be disbursed.  (4) A taxing unit shall hold not more than 2 elections in a calendar year concerning the authorization of a millage rate greater than the product of the immediately preceding year's reduced maximum authorized rate or rates as defined in section 34d(16) multiplied by the current year's millage reduction fraction, regardless of the number of questions presented at the election.

 

STATE CONSTITUTION OF MICHIGAN    Sec. 25. Property taxes and other local taxes and state taxation and spending may not be increased above the limitations specified herein without direct voter approval…

 

THE HOME RULE CITY ACT  MCL 117.5 Prohibited powers.  A city does not have power:  (a) To increase the rate of taxation now fixed by law, unless the authority to do so is given by a majority of the electors of the city voting at the election at which the proposition is submitted…

 

Seems pretty clear that the city council has no legal authority to raise these millage rates that are facing reduction without voter approval, and had no authority to do so last year either.  But even if there was not any such laws, ethically, they should scrap their Truth in Taxation Circus and instead start putting this on the fall ballot.  But is there any doubt this would lose resoundingly to an impoverished, overtaxed electorate?  Perhaps overburdened taxpayer Bob Neal put it in focus at the last meeting of the council: 

 

“The City is sending the wrong message to prospective buyers in this community that the City is already not competitive. He mentioned that the property taxes on his second home in Colorado are half of what they are on his condo in Ludington and the property in Colorado is 5 times more valuable than the condo in Ludington. A potential retiree is going to find it hard to buy in Ludington and pay 3, 4, and 5 times the property taxes that are paid in other states. On a $300,000 condo in One Ludington Place, the property taxes are $12,000 a year.”

[AQUAMAN]

Hit the nail on the head again, "so much for representative democracy". Are we not a nation that totally is for this type of governing, according to our own forefathers, our constitution, our bill of rights? Taxation without representation, we fought that battle long ago, and it still seems to haunt us to this very day irregardless of history. Sad but true for the small berg of Ludington and it's taxpayers. Btw, I saw Roger Castonia at a recent class reunion, he sat at a picnic table with several other relations named Castonia, and only Castonia's. As is normal, I expected him to get up and mingle with the many other former classmates as did I, to get around the block, so to speak. Every time I reentered his area on the grounds, he was glued to the same seat, only conversing with his own relatives. That bespeak of someone outgoing, wanting to mix, meet new constituents, talk to old friends, see what the people think of his work, get some ideas for improvements, or congrats. on work already done?