so i find it somewhat disappointing that not a single ballot item went my way today at the municipal elections.
there was the school board, which i have to admit that i didn't really do too much research into, but i DID pay attention to who campaigned in my neighborhood, as well as who sent me stuff, and i went with the two candidates that the mayor backed. neither of them made it, though.
the second ballot issue was the missouri statute that would increase property taxes (Prop. EJ) in order to fund improvements and growth within the St. Louis Community College branches. obviously, as an alumni of this fine institution, i was in favor of increased funding. however, i am not a property owner, yet, so it doesn't really affect me negatively. but still, if you do the math, the increase in property taxes for a homeowner of a house worth $150,000 would see their tax for the community college raised from $331.20/year to $511.20. This is only an increase of $180, and given that many people use an escrow account to pay their taxes, this will only increase their monthly mortgage payment by $15. not that big of a deal if people just think about how much this excellent community college does for our area. so many people take advantage of the affordable and competitive educational opportunities it provides, but i suppose even more people are still unaware.
the next issue was regarding recall elections, and the petition process required to initiate such an election. it had proposed extending the number of days to aquire the necessary signatures from 60 (i believe) to 180. however, the ballot wording made no such mention of the current procedure, so it is entirely possible that people didn't really know what the exisiting statute actually said. this is not uncommon, and i am pretty sure that most people don't really read the entire ballot, but you better believe i do. also, have just gone through a recall election within my own ward (24th), i don't think that giving people 6 months to gather signatures is fair. if you really want someone out of there, and the constituents agree, 60 days should be more than enough time for a well organized campaign to get their shit together.
and finally there was the graduated business liscence fee increase for st. louis city businesses. now, as the daughter of a small business owner in the city of st. louis, you might think i would be against this. but after thinking about it, i had to support it. apparently the cost of a business liscence in the city has not changed in nearly 20 years. and we all know how i feel about the growth of the city. so.....its simply completely necessary for all things to continue to grow to support the city's operating budget. and because i am a finance dork, i saw that even by increasing the cost of a liscence by $50, the fee hasn't nearly caught up with inflation. it's no wonder that the city hasn't been able to build revenue too quickly in the past couple decades or so. you can't possibly think that something that is worth nearly half of what it was 20 years ago could benefit the city in the same manner.
but in the end i have to say that i AM happy that i didn't have to use the stupid electronic voting machines again. apparently the one at the carpenters hall was broken (there's a shocker) cause i voted on a scantron-like paper and let this huge box suck in the ballot like a fax machine or something, and kept it locked inside. weird.
13 comments:
As both a STLCC student and a homeowner, I think that the tax (had it been approved) should have been waived for me. Alas, I forgot to vote (bad Smelliot, Bad! No beer for you!) because I went to the library instead...
That's a lot of money if you are poor (ie like me!)
last time i checked you didn't own a house, katherine.
i don't think it should have been that much, though, because every little bit helps, and they had to have realized that people would balk at it regardless, so try to make it easier to swallow, ya know?
I WILL say, though, that the measure passed by nearly 1000 votes in the city, and failed by nearly 3000 in the county....and who do you think has a higher per capita income? that's right.
right which means they are paying MORE in property taxes etc.
which is a lower percentage of their total income (ie less strenuous on the family budget). it is a flat rate, meaning it hurts the people with lower incomes more than those with higher incomes.
wah wah... the point is you don't have to pay them, its easy to vote to say lets burden a certain % of the population
i wouldn't complain if i DID have to pay. that's why i did the numbers and saw that if i DID own a home (which i would guess to be worth around 150k, that's my plan for my first house), i would only have to pay $15 more a month. and although it does seem like a big amount, and a smaller increase would have been a more palatable proposition, it's still not gonna send me and my teeny little income over the edge.
AND you kow the majority of people who turned out to vote, esp. in the city were NOT young renters like myself, but old, "stingy" homeowners.
$15 could be an insurance co-pay a senior could no longer afford... there goes grandma's heart medicine... or family's on a tight budget... oh little timmy can't have his inhaler this month
sure but people in those dire of situations generally don't own their own homes. they can't afford to in the first place. they rent. if $15 is gonna send them over the edge, and they DO own their own home, they won't be owning it for long anyway. sooner or later something is gonna come up, and something like a roof repair or a new refrigerator and it is gonna cost WAY more than $15.
I guarantee that if you did own a $150,000.00 house, you would also be considering that your escrow account goes up by leaps and bounds every other year with tax assessments and with the assumption that you work at Target, I know you would find the bills to be adding up more quickly than any target job can cover the costs- retail jobs just don’t increase wages as fast as everything else (i.e. gas, food) goes up, without having to pay an extra $15.00 per month on top of all the other non-expected and higher and higher bills. You too might find that any bill that requires you pay even a dollar for something that perhaps you didn’t use (I personally would rather give my money to the organizations that I personally have used or will use or be able to decide where my extra income will be ending up- you know like Katrina relief, researching ethanol and other renewable resources to run my car, the girl scouts, etc.) . Also you might buy a house for $150,000.00, but by the first tax assessment your payment will go up(this is inevitable and if it by some reason doesn’t go up, you bought the wrong house because the value isn’t going up- AKA no equity)-
Also here is a bit of a note- your taxes that you are quoting are ONLY for the community college- that does not include your property taxes for the home- i.e. over $1,000.00 for just a house if you live in the cheapest area in the county for your $150,000.00 home, plus your fees for living in the county...plus your utilities, plus your mortgage payment, plus fees that mortgage companies tack on for escrow balances being lower than what is owed now that you have a new commitment, plus, not to mention if you want to continue eating ...
See it isn’t as easy as $15.00 per month...
I do agree that some of the others could have been passed to get the area's revenue up, but the wording was muddled.
Another note... it is easier to burden others with a tax... but it sounds like you eventually want to buy a house... you need to realize that this tax will effect you, and also this was not a bill for a one year thing- the property values in the County and the City are averaging a 1.25% value increase per tax assessment meaning with each additional year you don't own a house the further they move from your financial reach- this would push the ellusive date when you can afford a house further away.
Also, not every home owner is an "old "stingy" homeowner" but if measures that keep younger people from being able to afford paying the taxes on a house are passed all of the home owners will be old
First of all, "anonymous"...i am pretty damn sure i know who this is, so your cover is blown. are you afraid i would be upset by a little intelligent discussion/swapping of opinions? ;)
Right, so yes, I do know that the escrow is adjusted every year, my parents went up something like $400 or $500 last year. It hurts, of course. Granted, Kirkwood probably has one of the higher increases in the area, and the city probably doesn't have the rate of increase the county does (though last year most everyone in the city got burned by higher assessments, too-although there was an appeals process that I know some people took advantage of).
As far as my Target salary goes, well, I was not assuming that as a single chica on an hourly wage, I would be attempting to buy a home. Nope, thats gonna happen AFTER I graduate and sell out and start making a real salary at somewhere other than the big red T. I actually can't think of a single hourly employee who is not married to someone making a decent salary who owns a home. And that is simply just a consequence of deciding to work at Target/anywhere that doesn't pay a reasonable salary.
And as far as giving your money to another organization that you "use"-well that is no different than the people who send their kids to private schools by choice, and then complain when school district taxes go up, cause they don't USE the public schools. The community college district is way bigger than say, the Kirkwood R-7, but it is a public school district just the same. That means everyone living within the district will pay the taxes to support it.
But you ignore the fact that actually everyone that I can think of DOES "use" the community college. This is because we have such a well-established, competetive institution that trains, educates, and supports people like nurses, paramedics, chefs, dental hygenists, lab techs, artists, writers, historians, and so many future business people of our community. There is a larger impact on the community by STLCC than most people realize. Tuition is steadily rising, and if the funding isn't periodically increased, then more and more people will be faced with the inability to pay for college to have a job that gets them out of places like Target.
Of course owning a home is filled with so many more expenses that simply the mortgage. I realize this, and would never expect it to be so simple or easy. But the only way a community can continue to thrive and flourish is if it's residents have access to quality education and training. The divide between the "haves" and "have-nots" is growing, and also right in Kirkwood's own "backyard" if you will.
Finally....sorry about the muddled wording, but you see how coherent you can be when writing about stuff like this at almost 1 in the morning after going to school/studying all day, and then working all night. My brain was pooped.
I think you misread my "old stingy homeowner" comment. I was referring to the typical voter demographic, especially in the city. I have NEVER seen anyone within 15 years of my age while voting, and the vast majority of the people I DO see at the Carpenter's Hall are members of the 50+ club.
The Numbers:
St. Louis City Results:
YES: 13,454 (57.54%)
NO: 9,928 (42.46%)
St. Louis County Results:
YES: 45,821 (45%)
NO: 55,395 (54%)
I'd say it would be fair to assume that the per capita income in the city is lower than in the county. However, it would also be fair to assume that most voters are homeowners. SO, the lower income homeowners STILL favored the increase.
Post a Comment