Public needs specifics before fire tax approval

Coming off the heels of a resounding defeat of a use tax pitched to "level the playing field" for area businesses such as car dealerships that could lose business across the river, the Cape Girardeau City Council last week decided to put the renewal of a one-eighth-cent fire sales tax on the ballot for August.

The use tax was an interesting vote. Perhaps it was not surprising it was defeated, but by how much. In the city, 724 people voted for the use tax, while 1,535 voted no.

A question posed around the newspaper office was why such a resounding defeat? Cape Girardeau voters have a recent history of supporting local tax initiatives, whether it be for schools, parks, public safety or roads.

Was the use tax defeated because it was hard to explain? It's assumed many voters simply voted no because they saw the word "tax" on the ballot. Did voters understand how the use tax worked and how it would be applied only to out-of-state purchases? Was education an issue? Maybe people simply wanted to preserve the right to save money on items and purchases they can make in other states.

Was the tax defeated because there was no specific project tied to it? One of the reasons Cape Girardeau's Transportation Trust Fund tax has been so successful is because of its simplicity and transparency. When voters vote on TTF, they know exactly what new roads will be built, which roads will be improved, widened and so forth. When those projects are finished, the city puts forth another list for voter approval.

With the use tax, there was no such list, nor was there a sunset. The tax was pitched as a help to local businesses, but how the extra revenue would be spent wasn't addressed in a specific way. It should be mentioned the use tax was also defeated on the countywide level and in Jackson.

We have also heard a sentiment if the use tax, which would have brought in more revenue, would have been offset by a reduction in taxes elsewhere, such as property tax that was proposed by Councilman Wayne Bowen, the tax would've had a better shot. A strong voice exists in the community that the city is getting significant extra revenue from the casino, so why is it asking for new and extended taxes?

So that brings us back to the public safety tax.

The city council began discussing the justification of a public safety tax at Thursday's daylong council retreat.

Traditionally, according to the city manager, Scott Meyer, the fire tax has helped provide police and fire vehicles and safety gear. But the future of the tax is aimed at maintaining those needs and the current level of service, Meyer said.

One of the top priorities being discussed is replacing a fire station on Kurre Lane, one of the city's smallest but busiest fire stations. Council members discussed how much money from the fire tax could be allocated toward a much-needed police station. A new police station could come with a $13 million bill. How the bigger projects tie in with continued service and other, smaller day-to-day needs of the police and fire departments is yet to be seen.

It should go without saying that public safety is an essential part of a community. Not only do the police and fire departments save and protect lives, but our pocketbooks as well. Insurance companies set home rates based partly by the quality of fire departments. Whatever plan the city puts forth will be one worth closely considering, regardless of tax weariness.

But the city has a lot of work ahead. Coming up with a clear plan and explaining that plan to the public will be vital to passage. Even then, voters still may reject it on a taxed-enough position.

New Councilman Joseph Uzoaru pointed out the need for clear communication when he and the rest of the council voted to put the issue on the August ballot.

It's still April. But August will be here before you know it. We anticipate the city will be working hard in the coming weeks to put forth a reasonable plan to the public to consider.