City makes strong case for tax-fee issues

In just over two weeks, Cape Girardeau residents will vote on four revenue-producing taxes and fees. If the city is to continue to offer the services that a major regional hub city requires, it is going to take additional revenue.

Voters who share the vision of a prosperous community with the facilities and tools to do what's needed will vote yes on all four issues.

The overarching question is this: Has the city made a convincing case that current sources of revenue are insufficient to pay for basic operations and the most urgent high-cost projects? The answer, based on months and months of deliberations by a task force of city employees and then by a task force of city residents, was a resounding yes.

Initially, the city employees recommended an increase in the city sales tax that would have been sufficient to generate enough revenue for the most important items on a long wish list. And that single issue would have been far easier to explain and promote in front of voters than the four-part package recommended by the citizens task force and adopted by the city council.

A four-part proposal

What voters face now are a quarter-cent increase in the sales tax, the imposition of a 2 percent use tax, a storm-water fee and the extension of a 10-cent property-tax levy that's due to expire soon.

Each of these four components have aspects that need special explanations. For example, the sales tax is identified on the ballot as being for the fire department. Increases in the sales tax have to be linked to specific needs, just like the special sales tax for street improvements that voters have enthusiastically supported twice. This time, the fire department sales tax revenue would free up general revenue currently budgeted for the department to be used for other city operations.

The use tax is probably the most puzzling of the proposals. A use tax is like a sales tax on large purchases (over $2,000 a year total) from out-of-state vendors. The state has had a use tax for a long time, and it is associated with business purchases. The city's use tax would be collected from the same state use-tax payers.

Since anyone who owns property in the city is already paying the 10-cent property-tax levy, the proposed extension wouldn't increase the tax burden, but it would mean the tax rate wouldn't go down as planned.

The storm-water fee is the only proposal that is linked directly to specific projects. All of the revenue from these fees would go for that purpose. The fee would be similar to the sewer and trash fees that appear on every city water bill.

Priority spending list

To give voters some idea of how the extra revenue would be used, the city has adopted a priority list of projects: operating expenses, equipment replacement, storm-water projects, new Fire Station No. 3, expansion and renovation of the police station and a family water park.

Despite dozens of educational presentations made by city officials, there are still some voters who think each tax or fee proposal is linked to a specific project. That's not the case. Only the storm-water revenue would be earmarked for storm-water projects, but officials say those projects will need to be addressed even if the special fee is not approved.

In effect, the city needs all four of the proposals to pass to accomplish the most basic objectives of increasing operating funds and tackling some large and important projects. The city estimates this would cost the average family $100 a year. Of course, some would pay more, and some would pay less. Voters will have to decide if they agree this is a fair amount to pay for important city operations and services.