Anyone over the age of 20 remembers President Reagan's famous "trickle down" approach for economic growth.
Incessant increases on every possible tax revenue source can stifle local economies, also creating a "trickle down" or ripple effect for loss of jobs, business closures, decreasing tourism and diminishing a community's overall quality of life.
There is a saying that "all politics are local," which ultimately infers that all government budgets -- federal, state, county or town -- will have an impact on individual finances. From income, employment, gas, utilities, and food to various sales taxes, registration or inspection fees, additional taxes applied on large purchases or investments -- it's almost easier to try to identify what isn't taxed instead of the cummulative tax burden. The question becomes: what services do citizens receive in return?
At the state level, Virginia's General Assembly is preparing for another highly partisan budget battle as both the Senate and House argue over defining and funding essential services. With a projected revenue shortfall on top of neglected or unmet needs, citizens of the Commonwealth should expect to see a change in how lottery proceeds are used. Remember, the lottery was established by referendum to supplement public education costs.
Citizens should also expect the state trend for shifting funding of essential services onto local governments to continue full speed. Legislators also suggest a "cease funding" for all non-state agencies (arts, music, public recreation, museums, public health centers, foster care, food pantries, etc.).
How many worthy community services will be lost in localities unable to support these on their own? Does this impact the quality of life for citizens of the Commonwealth, or make the state less attractive to new businesses or residents?
This shift in the state budget creates a tough assignment for counties, towns or cities, as each has significant constraints on how they may generate revenue. State legislators don't often propose raising taxes, yet do continue to shift that burden -- and blame -- onto local governments and officials. In many instances there are state requirements for providing a specific type or level of service, yet the locality must fund them, in whole or in part.
So now we have essential services and mandates. Mandates are mandates, like Nike -- just do it. It must be done, as at some point a law was written requiring X is done (like K-12 public education with certain standards). What does it cost and who is paying for it? Doesn't matter, just get 'er done.
But how would you define essential services? Fire, rescue, police and court services? Clean air and water, and public sewers? Access to education? Access to information (electricity, communication networks)? Access to mental health services or a doctor? Recreational amenities? Safe roads? Being assured that products you buy or foods you eat are safe?
The crux is defining which ones are essential to the most, and the value of each service provided by government for the public good. In doing so, what is being delayed or discarded is also being determined.
Citizens continue to have the highest expectations -- as earnings flatten, costs of meeting basic needs and providing for public services soar, and we are sought out to support worthy community projects -- that public dollars are being managed as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Next: Local services and tax sources.