Gulliford wants voters to decide on half-cent sales-tax to pay down pension

[edjax]

We can't trust the general public to make a fully educated decision, or to impose a tax on themselves. Putting the increase to a public vote is a way to pass the burden of decision making off on the public. We elect representatives to study the factors involved and make educated decisions on our behalf, but increasingly they are afraid to make the tough decisions or take a stand on something controversial for fear of losing votes and not getting re-elected. It's time we expect our elected officials to actually lead.

Bold campaign strategy: declare that the general public is not educated enough to vote on substantive issues.

Perhaps he has been hanging with that guy that was the architect of the Affordable Healthcare Act?!?!

[vicupstate]

As I understand it, property taxes were cut and the pension not fully funded during the '90's and early 2000's. Therefore, why shouldn't property taxes be raised to make up at least part of the shortfall?  The overly generous pension needs to be trimmed to cover some of the problem as well.

The Better Jacksonville Plan was funded by raising the sales tax by referendum, but it involved a long laundry list of tangible project all over the county. While it did pass easily, I think you are kidding yourself if you think a sales tax increase would be voter approved when the benefit will go to a tiny silver of the county's population, and most people voting don't get a pension of any kind. 

Peyton could and should have passed a solution while he was in his final term. But that would have required courage/leadership he didn't have.     

I get that a sales tax would be spread across tourists and exurbanites, but in reality it will never pass and then you are back to square one.

[thelakelander]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

[CityLife]

Vic, I agree the public would never vote for it. They simply may not be able realize the long term repercussions of the pension debt and the benefit of paying it down with sales tax, rather than increasing their own property taxes, or losing valuable public services (from a city that is already underfunded).

It is a complex issue, and our leaders shouldn't expect the public to understand the long term financial implications or be able to weigh the different alternatives. What's next, a referendum to pass the yearly city budget? You guys should probably back off Jason's statement. He's not exactly way out there, and I think a lot of people would agree with his sentiment.

[CityLife]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

There is always the fear tactic though. The sponsors of this can say, based on our projections, if this isn't passed to cover the pension crisis, x city services will be cut, property taxes will be raised by x amount, x, y, and z major capital improvement projects will never be done, and so on.

[Bridges]

We can't trust the general public to make a fully educated decision, or to impose a tax on themselves. Putting the increase to a public vote is a way to pass the burden of decision making off on the public. We elect representatives to study the factors involved and make educated decisions on our behalf, but increasingly they are afraid to make the tough decisions or take a stand on something controversial for fear of losing votes and not getting re-elected. It's time we expect our elected officials to actually lead.

Agree 1000%.  This is passing the buck bullshit.  Bold leaders are needed.  Council and leaders have been through these rounds multiple times, seen and discussed several plans.  If they truly think a half-cent measure is needed then vote it.  Up or down, and live with the results.  We elected them to make our decisions.

[Bridges]

I think this should also be considered a shot at Mayor Brown.  Nothing drives Republicans and Conservatives to the polls like a vote on tax increases. 

[thelakelander]

Btw, I also have a problem with our tendency of tunnel vision. Over the last year, I've heard various public officials call for sales tax increases for river dredging, libraries and now the pension. Which one isn't going to be? The great thing about the BJP is it included a little something for nearly everybody in town.  Any push to get the public to agree to tax themselves more is going to require the same type of strategy.

[thelakelander]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

There is always the fear tactic though. The sponsors of this can say, based on our projections, if this isn't passed to cover the pension crisis, x city services will be cut, property taxes will be raised by x amount, x, y, and z major capital improvement projects will never be done, and so on.

This didn't work in the latest rounds of sales tax increase pushes for various items in Tampa Bay, Pinellas County, Polk County, and Metropolitan Atlanta in recent years. I'm not sold it will work here either.

[CityLife]

I think this should also be considered a shot at Mayor Brown.  Nothing drives Republicans and Conservatives to the polls like a vote on tax increases.

Nice deduction. Might even be straight from Curry's camp or the local GOP.

[Cheshire Cat]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

I would agree but would also say that solving the pension problem to many would be a tangible result.  The pension problem resulted in the leadership of the time taking a "pension" holiday when there was plenty of money to pay into the funds.  They just did not pay into the program as they should have.  That was not the basis for a property tax cut.  The money was there with or without the cut in taxes.  Those in office just failed to pay into the pensions and clearly were derelict in their duty to long standing pension agreements with the JSO and JFRD.  I think before any sales tax increase appears on a ballot somewhere, there has to be a clear understanding in the public what those funds will be used for.  I still say the first step in all of this is a court ruling on whether or not the pension deals were legal, which I suspect they are.  However that "Boogie man" will continue to be a spoiler in the process when it comes to solving this issue.  It needs to come down to a clear statement of  "this is the amount of dollars we owe to a proven legal agreement and it will cost this much to fix it".  The people deserve a voice in how that fix happens.  A sales tax increase should be one option available.  There is not a single solution at this point that will be painless. As it stands we have elected officials who have sat through all the discussions on pension and there is no collective agreement about the solution.  This has nothing to do with bold leadership.  It has to do with this being a convoluted issue being faced by many cities across the nation.  In our city leadership has simply kicked the can down the road and everyone in the public can understand that basic truth. 

[thelakelander]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

I would agree but would also say that solving the pension problem to many would be a tangible result.

Yes, to many. But we're talking about winning over the majority of voters.  I'd wager that this "many" is a "minority" on a grander scale. The majority haven't felt the pain of a bankrupt government. As long as their street lights are on, water is running, the trash is picked up on a regular basis and they're gainfully employed, most aren't even thinking about the city's pension issue.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

But if you just increase taxes to cover the current deficit, you're essentially kicking the can at the expense of everyone, right?

I won't claim to know very much about the inner workings of our pension, but from what I believe to understand is that it's completely unsustainable in it's current form.

What progress/initiatives/proposals do we have to fix the actual problem?  It seems we're tackling this issue by trying to figure out which bucket to use to collect the water from a leak in the roof rather than ripping up shingles to figure out why it's leaking in the first place.

[Cheshire Cat]

If you're going the sales tax route, you'll have to give the public tangible projects......if you want it to stand a chance of passing. Asking the public to approve paying a higher sales tax to handle the pension issue will end in sure defeat. I also believe it's an easy way off kicking the can down the road.

I would agree but would also say that solving the pension problem to many would be a tangible result.

Yes, to many. But we're talking about winning over the majority of voters.  I'd wager that this "many" is a "minority" on a grander scale. The majority haven't felt the pain of a bankrupt government. As long as their street lights are on, water is running, the trash is picked up on a regular basis and they're gainfully employed, most aren't even thinking about the city's pension issue.

Which is why I used the word "many".    A vote would tell us how "many" actually would support or reject such an idea.  I am simply saying it is worth discussion and consideration.   Whether or not the people would vote for it I haven't a clue at this juncture. 

[Cheshire Cat]

But if you just increase taxes to cover the current deficit, you're essentially kicking the can at the expense of everyone, right?

I won't claim to know very much about the inner workings of our pension, but from what I believe to understand is that it's completely unsustainable in it's current form.

What progress/initiatives/proposals do we have to fix the actual problem?  It seems we're tackling this issue by trying to figure out which bucket to use to collect the water from a leak in the roof rather than ripping up shingles to figure out why it's leaking in the first place.

The pension deficit grows daily and remains in limbo.  As stated earlier, it will be a whole bunch of "other folks" be they voters or not who will pay to fix this problem.  No answer to this that will make people unified or happy.