Taxes, spending, politics and responsibility

Our Opinion

Friday, May 1, 2009

It was political theater, not really much different from the teachers who showed up with blue umbrellas for their own rally to draw attention to their calls for increased education funding.

The choice of target for the tax protesters was the same as County Commissioner Larry Jarboe's — what's called the constant yield rate, which is how much the commissioners would have to cut the tax rate to make up for rising property assessments. It's an odd target in a way; the property tax rate in St. Mary's is sixth lowest in the state and there are already measures in place to ease the property tax burden for low-income people and freeze taxes for the elderly.

St. Mary's County's income tax rate, however, is sixth highest in Maryland at 3 percent of taxable income. Even worse is the local energy tax, which is 1.25 percent tacked onto everyone's electricity and heating bills. This is a tax that goes up at the worst possible time — whenever energy prices go up. It should be eliminated.

But that wasn't the focus last week. The focus was the constant yield tax rate and next year's election.

Most people aren't thinking much about the 2010 election at this point. They're still recovering from the last one. But politicians are, and they're looking for issues. Those who don't hold power have picked taxes.

Some citizens involved in the rally and the public hearing no doubt are genuinely concerned about the property tax rate, which perhaps is more of a burden to them than the income tax rate or the energy tax. And citizens have a right to protest taxes or anything else they'd like.

Some of the commissioners pointed out that none of those speaking last week suggested how to make up the $6 million hole the constant yield tax rate would blow in the proposed county budget. But that's not really their responsibility. That rests with the county commissioners. The commissioners must balance the need for services, the money available and set tax rates. Then they must defend those choices.

It is the responsibility of all five commissioners, and this is where Jarboe has failed to do his job. He has every right to whip up his constituents in advance of his re-election bid with calls to cut property taxes, but he also has the responsibility to say how he'll balance the budget. He has talked of combining two county departments that deal with economic development and land use. That would make barely a dent in the $6 million. Otherwise he has proposed no specific cuts, though he did say last week he'd call for county agencies to submit budget proposals based on level funding and on a 5 percent cut. It's getting late in the game for that — that would entail a lot specific budget cuts chosen by nonelected officials and the budget must be finalized by the end of this month.

In the end, Jarboe may bear none of the responsibility for a final county budget that is likely to pass without his vote. That's political positioning heading into an election year. The trouble is that some people may take the rhetoric too seriously, such as the man who stood at the public hearing and said that he was looking forward to seeing the commissioners, except for Jarboe, in the obituary pages of The Enterprise.

Jarboe disavowed those comments later in the week. But those who whip up these sorts of passions with an eye to the next election can't evade responsibility for them.