Category: default || By jt3y

I'm too busy to write an Almanac right now, which is bugging me, because I'd really like to write about the "Act 1" taxes that voters in most Mon-Yough area school districts are supposed to vote on next week. Act 1 would allow school districts to raise their wage taxes in order to lower property taxes. (Eventually, as I understand it, the higher tax rates are supposed to be phased out in favor of revenue from the state's slot machine casinos.)

It seems like a big fat boondoggle to me. The law allows districts to enact not just higher wage taxes but "personal income taxes." I think that would cover not just "earned income" but also income from dividends, lottery winnings, savings-account interest --- basically, any income you have to report to the IRS on your federal tax form.

If you're in one of those districts and your neighbors vote for Act 1 next week, get ready to pay more, not less, in school taxes. According to the figures that were in the Daily News this week (none of the stories or editorials are online), most taxpayers are going to take it in the shorts. In some districts, if you make more than about $26,000 per year, you're getting hosed.

. . .

You'll also have to fill out another lengthy tax form each year, which means school districts will pay more to process tax collections. If I didn't know better, I'd say this legislation is designed to benefit private tax collection companies like Berkheimer, Keystone Municipal Collections, Legal Tax Service, Pennsylvania Municipal Service, etc. I suspect many school districts that currently process their own wage and property taxes are going to throw up their hands and hire one of those companies.

The Rendell administration rammed Act 1 to us on the grounds that it would lower property taxes on the elderly and people on fixed incomes. But it seems to me that senior citizens are often living on savings and investments, which aren't currently taxed by school boards because they're not "earned income."

. . .

If their school districts impose personal income taxes, the cries are going to be loud and shrill. Effigy sales will be up 300 percent in parts of Western Pennsylvania, and boiling kettles of oil will appear on the lawns of some local high schools.

So, I'm really curious to see what happens on Tuesday. It's an off-year, primary election, which means that only the real die-hards are going to go to the polls --- and that means mostly elderly and retired voters.

One would expect them to vote for any referendum that promises to lower their property taxes. But if they realize it might also take a bite out of their investments, then they'd probably vote no. On the other hand, how many people truly understand the legislation? I'm not even sure I'm explaining it correctly.

. . .

Ronald Reagan famously said that the scariest words in the English language were "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." I'm firmly convinced that the Gipper was correct, at least when it comes to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

It seems to me that Act 1 is a Hobson's choice at best, and a fraud at worst. If you're among the 20 or 30 percent of registered voters who go to the polls on Tuesday, you're voting on whether you'd rather be murdered or commit suicide.

Anyway, that's what I'd write if I had time to write.

. . .

Trash Talk: And if I had time to write, I'd also mention that Our Fair City is going to crack down on people who aren't paying their garbage collection bills. (Jen Vertullo story from the News, subscribers-only link.) If you don't pay, the city is going to stop collecting your garbage.

I understand the sentiment, but a high percentage of properties in the city are rented to low-income families, which is one of the things that's already destroying many neighborhoods. (According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 3,862 of McKeesport's 11,119 housing units are rentals, or 34 percent.)

In many cases, I suspect the landlords are supposed to be paying the garbage fees, and either live out of state or are hiding behind real estate investment trusts. Most of them can't be bothered to cut the grass or maintain their properties now. When the city stops collecting the garbage, it will either sit on the curb and rot, or else tenants will throw it in the back yard or dump it illegally.

With due respect to Mayor Brewster and city council, how is this going to make McKeesport a nicer place to live?

I don't know how the city can easily punish deadbeat landlords ("slumlords" is more like it) but stopping garbage collection will only accelerate the decline of neighborhoods that are already suffering along Versailles Avenue, Jenny Lind Street, Evans Avenue, Shaw Avenue and elsewhere.

This seems like a well-intentioned proposal that's will backfire spectacularly. Kind of like Act 1, now that I think of it.

. . .

Like I said, I don't have time to write today. But if I did, those are the kinds of things I would write about.