March 29, 2024
Archive

Bangor council to take position on tax question

BANGOR – While most of the six city councilors attending a committee meeting Monday voted not to revisit their earlier resolve supporting a Maine Municipal Association-led tax reform plan, the council’s next meeting agenda will include a resolve backing the governor’s competing measure.

A resolve in support of the tax reform plan developed by Gov. John Baldacci will appear on the agenda for the council’s Oct. 15 meeting at the request of Councilor Dan Tremble. In Bangor, individual councilors are permitted to add items to the meeting agenda by tradition.

If a majority of councilors vote to support the governor’s alternate tax reform plan, the new document would supersede the resolution the council adopted last October in support of the plan now known as ballot Question 1A, according to City Manager Edward Barrett.

If the councilors do not endorse the resolution backing the Baldacci plan – Question 1B on the Nov. 4 ballot – their support for the MMA plan will stand, Barrett said.

Tremble and Councilor Gerry Palmer were on the losing side of a 4-2 decision not to revisit the position the council took last October in support of the MMA’s tax reform proposal, which was placed on the Nov. 4 statewide ballot as a citizen initiative.

Mayor Nichi Farnham and councilors Frank Farrington, David Nealley and Richard Greene had voted to let the city’s endorsement of the MMA tax reform plan stand.

When councilors expressed their support for that plan last October, it was the only viable option that existed.

The next month, Baldacci was elected governor. Over the summer, he created what would become ballot Question 1B as an alternative to the MMA plan.

During the council’s deliberations on their endorsement options, Tremble said it was important Bangor take a position on tax reform, even if the position was not unanimous.

Tremble and Palmer said they supported the Baldacci proposal because it would achieve the desired results in a slower and “a little less painful” way, which they agreed would be better for Bangor in the long run. Palmer saw the proposal the MMA put forth as too severe, an “overcorrection” of Maine’s property tax problem.

Farrrington said the two reform proposals were steps in the right direction but that neither went far enough when it came to reducing spending.

Nealley said he was inclined to stick with the council’s original endorsement, noting that it was “one way to get the Legislature to act and act aggressively,” while the competing measure delayed the tough decisions.

Question 1 offers voters three options for tackling an ongoing problem blamed on the Legislature’s failure to follow through on a pledge to fund the state’s share of local education costs at 55 percent.

The state’s share of local education now is about 43 percent. After the state failed to fulfill the 55 percent promise for nearly two decades, the MMA launched a citizen initiative gathering more than 100,000 signatures to put Question 1A on the ballot.

This plan requires the Legislature to identify funding sources to raise the state’s share of local education costs to 55 percent in a “revenue neutral” manner, though what revenue neutral means remains to be defined. Also, nothing in the legislation prevents lawmakers from raising taxes to meet the initiative’s demands.

Question 1B was developed by Baldacci and amended last month by the Legislature. Proponents of the revised proposal say it would phase in additional education funds over a five-year period until the 55 percent goal is reached.

Its implementation, however, depends entirely on the support of future legislatures and Baldacci’s re-election to a second term.

Proponents say they could reach 55 percent with the implementation of the legislatively approved, but not yet fully funded, school essential programs and services plan, which would set uniform education standards through the most cost-effective means. Question 1B also provides another $40 million through June 30, 2005, to enhance property tax relief now available under the state’s “circuit-breaker” and Homestead Exemption programs.

Question 1C allows voters to reject both the citizen initiative and the competing measure.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like