Quote of the Day

“We can’t come up here and ask the state for more money and we can’t go back to our communities and ask our taxpayers for more money.”

Simsbury First Selectwoman Mary Glassman, on the plight municipalities are facing this year.

The article, over at CTNJ, is definitely worth reading, as it explores a lot of the problems cities and towns are staring at this budget season.

Advertisements

21 responses to “Quote of the Day

  1. The Democrats’ inability to even discuss the possibility of spending reductions is mind boggling. The state government they created has helped tank our economy (no, not the sole reason, but a contributing factor for sure) and all they want to talk about is the revenue side of the equation. The “leadership” in the legislature needs to do what all the rest of us our doing – reign-in their appetite for spending beyond their means.

  2. yeah there definitely tends to be a focus on increasing the black ink rather than cutting the red ink…

  3. “We can’t come up here and ask the state for more money and we can’t go back to our communities and ask our taxpayers for more money.”

    Has she ever thought about making tough cuts, do Simsbury and other communities really need all the school administrators they have employed?

    Why always take the easy way out?

  4. The current “crisis” simply reemphasizes the fact that Connecticut needs to take a look at its taxing structure. The sales tax is regressive, and property taxes are inequitable. Taxing income is a fair way of raising revenue, particularly in an environment where people are losing their jobs and their homes. Additonally, taxing estates would raise plenty of revenue in this state and the impact would mostly be felt by dead people. I can make my own way in this world, I don’t need an inheritance from dad to be comfortable. American is not supposed to create aristocracies. It is supposed to be a place where each man and woman is judged on his or her own merit. Tax me when I’m dead all you want, just ease up on me and let me pay what is fair while I’m alive.

  5. Taxing income is a fair way of raising revenue, particularly in an environment where people are losing their jobs and their homes.

    Connecticut currently does levy an income tax.

    Towns could not efficiently levy an income tax that would piggy back onto the Connecticut income tax. First, a huge number of the highest wage earners in the state work in NY, and pay their income taxes to Albany. In my town, Ridgefield, almost everyone works in NY state. Allowing towns to levy taxes on people who worked there would mean that a huge number of people would be subject to income taxes in towns other than the towns they live in. Income tax rates would quickly skyrocket, since the people voting for the taxes would not be the same as the people who were paying the taxes.

    We have 169 towns. Each town is an average of about 36 square miles, or 6 by 6 miles.

    Property taxes are not perfect, but they are probably the best method for municipalities in our state to raise revenue.

  6. …taxing estates would raise plenty of revenue in this state and the impact would mostly be felt by dead people.

    I wish I needed to worry about that.

    However, all it will do is create more people in the nicer neighborhoods all over CT driving around with Florida plates on their cars as they’ll get themselves domiciled there thus avoiding the whole thing.

  7. The current “crisis” simply reemphasizes the fact that Connecticut needs to take a look at its taxing structure. The sales tax is regressive, and property taxes are inequitable. Taxing income is a fair way of raising revenue, particularly in an environment where people are losing their jobs and their homes. Additonally, taxing estates would raise plenty of revenue in this state and the impact would mostly be felt by dead people. I can make my own way in this world, I don’t need an inheritance from dad to be comfortable. American is not supposed to create aristocracies. It is supposed to be a place where each man and woman is judged on his or her own merit. Tax me when I’m dead all you want, just ease up on me and let me pay what is fair while I’m alive.

    Speak for yourself. There’s nothing “fair” about what you’ve written.

  8. I posted about this conference yesterday as well at Real Hartford. I think what people are missing about the tax idea is that it would be regional, not varying from town-to-town. The tax revenue would be used in the region it came from. That seems like an incentive to shop locally.

  9. Kerri – The problem with regional sales tax is that, just like with all revenue streams, the biggest cities will get the bulk of the pot – even though there is precious little retail in hartford. So once again, surrounding smaller towns will simply pay more than their share so that the bloated big city governments can maintain status quo.

  10. easthartfordtaxpayer

    I miss the rating system.

  11. Ichabod Crane

    I miss the rating system.

    Genghis saw his opportunity to remove it when the site crashed and he took it.

  12. That seems like an incentive to shop locally.

    Or – depending on the tax rate, not to!

    Colorado has (or had) city and county sales taxes making some people drive a little before they purchased a new TV, major appliance, etc.

    Higher tax area retailers had to respond by offering free delivery to those living in lower tax areas; but no one went out of their way to shop in those stores if they already lived in such area.

    Overall it’s a business killer.

  13. easthartfordtaxpayer said:
    I miss the rating system.

    Here ya go!

  14. CrankyYankee71

    I agree with CTcentrist’s post with one word change that may seem minor, but makes all the difference in the way we think about what politicians are doing with spending decisions.

    . . . The “leadership” in the legislature needs to do what all the rest of us our doing – reign-in their appetite for spending beyond their means.

    I would change this to “reign in their appetite for spending beyon OUR means.” Until politicians change their attitude and view that they are spending their money, they should not be elected/re-elected. This is OUR money – yours and mine. It is not their money or their means. They have no means but that which we contribute.

  15. If cities and towns are looking for money why do they not ask for reforms in the current prevailing wage laws. That would save millions for taxpayers without raising taxes.

  16. “The current “crisis” simply reemphasizes the fact that Connecticut needs to take a look at its taxing structure.”

    I respectfully submit to you this current crisis, and this is a crisis, only reemphasizes the fact that Connecticut needs to look far deeper into, and greatly reduce it’s wasteful spending structure……

    In fact if the General Asembly and Governor actually did so you, as well as all of us, would get the tax fairness you ask for while your alive………

    But go on believing this is a tax structure problem. You could double how much we raise in taxes, only to learn the General Assembly will triple the ways it will waste it.

  17. disgruntled_republican

    If cities and towns are looking for money why do they not ask for reforms in the current prevailing wage laws. That would save millions for taxpayers without raising taxes.

    Some of us have. Raising what qualifies as prevailing wage will go a long way towards helping municipalities make ends meet both short term & long term.

  18. Prevailing wage is the number one issues facing municipalities and allows them little flexibility when it comes to budgeting. Whether you are for it or against it …its a fact.

  19. You can throw binding arb in the mix as well.

  20. I don’t know if prevailing wage has the same impact as binding arbitration, but both are worth looking at. There’s clearly a disconnect between taxpayers needs and the process by which unionized municipal and state employees get annual pay raises. But without prevailing wage laws no one would get paid anything close to what unionized workers get for the same job. Wasn’t prevailing wage supposed to both help the working class while also taking away some of the power of the unions? We wouldn’t need unions if everyone was treated with respect in terms of fair wages and safety. We all know that’s not the case despite improvements in job safety regulations and such.

    Seems like a lot of folks don’t think we need any teachers or cops or guidance counselors or firefighters or principals or school nurses… but everyone says they work all the time too. So if those public employees aren’t going to keep an eye on things and you’re on the job all the time… who will raise kids anymore? Something’s not workin’.

  21. We can’t all just retire.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s