Holding local governments accountable for SPLOST abuse
You can almost hear local officials licking their lips in anticipation of another SPLOST tax renewal. Local towns and the county government are currently drawing up their plans for how they want to spend some $47 million in anticipated revenues.
But there’s one problem — voters. For any local government to get a dime of SPLOST will require voter approval in November. That’s not a foregone conclusion.
For one thing, voters are in an anti-tax mood. With the private sector suffering in the recession, people are tired of government officials who expect to maintain their status quo.
In Jackson County, voters do seem somewhat amenable to the county government using SPLOST to reduce its mountain of debt. On the other hand, county voters know they were denied the chance to vote on that debt. Remember how county leaders refused to allow a vote on the courthouse debt? Remember how other debt has since been levied by using legal maneuvers to avoid a citizens’ vote?
So what incentive do citizens have to approve a SPLOST to pay for huge projects county leaders refused to put before them on a ballot? (And now county leaders threaten, “either pass the SPLOST or we’ll hike property taxes.” That has all the makings of a revolt.)
In addition, some of the county’s debt has apparently been incurred in such a way that SPLOST can’t directly pay it off. That will cause even further distortions of the fiscal budget in trying to find a legal move to do it anyway.
But the big problem is the county’s cities, all of which claim a part of the SPLOST income. Some towns have openly misspent past SPLOST dollars on inane projects, or to pay for expenses unrelated to what SPLOST was intended to do. Abuse of SPLOST dollars among the towns in Jackson County has been widespread; why should voters allow that to continue?
The county government could have stopped that this year by keeping all the SPLOST revenue for county level projects. But board of commission members are afraid if they don’t give the towns a cut, the mayors of the municipalities will work against their reelections, so the county caved to political pressure and decided to give the towns SPLOST dollars again.
Voters are skeptical about this SPLOST and county leaders will have to demonstrate three things clearly if they want to rally voters for a renewal:
1. Accountability. Every dime of SPLOST should be accounted for and spent only for what voters approve. If there is no built-in accountability, the SPLOST should be voted down.
2. Transparency. The ballot should list only specific projects, not some vague use like “water infrastructure.” If the ballot is vague, the SPLOST should be killed.
3. No new spending. Every government on the ballot should be required to spend a vast majority of SPLOST for debt reduction, not new projects or new spending. New projects create new costs that shows up as ongoing expenses in the budget. If debt payment isn’t the main expense, the SPLOST should be denied by voters in November.
If local governments would follow the intent of SPLOST — to pay for major capital projects that are approved by voters — then there probably wouldn’t be a problem. But local governments have abused the SPLOST in the past and there is no teeth in state law to hold them accountable.
Only voters have the power to make certain SPLOST isn’t abused by demanding greater accountability and, if necessary, voting down the entire proposal.
For one thing, voters are in an anti-tax mood. With the private sector suffering in the recession, people are tired of government officials who expect to maintain their status quo.
In Jackson County, voters do seem somewhat amenable to the county government using SPLOST to reduce its mountain of debt. On the other hand, county voters know they were denied the chance to vote on that debt. Remember how county leaders refused to allow a vote on the courthouse debt? Remember how other debt has since been levied by using legal maneuvers to avoid a citizens’ vote?
So what incentive do citizens have to approve a SPLOST to pay for huge projects county leaders refused to put before them on a ballot? (And now county leaders threaten, “either pass the SPLOST or we’ll hike property taxes.” That has all the makings of a revolt.)
In addition, some of the county’s debt has apparently been incurred in such a way that SPLOST can’t directly pay it off. That will cause even further distortions of the fiscal budget in trying to find a legal move to do it anyway.
But the big problem is the county’s cities, all of which claim a part of the SPLOST income. Some towns have openly misspent past SPLOST dollars on inane projects, or to pay for expenses unrelated to what SPLOST was intended to do. Abuse of SPLOST dollars among the towns in Jackson County has been widespread; why should voters allow that to continue?
The county government could have stopped that this year by keeping all the SPLOST revenue for county level projects. But board of commission members are afraid if they don’t give the towns a cut, the mayors of the municipalities will work against their reelections, so the county caved to political pressure and decided to give the towns SPLOST dollars again.
Voters are skeptical about this SPLOST and county leaders will have to demonstrate three things clearly if they want to rally voters for a renewal:
1. Accountability. Every dime of SPLOST should be accounted for and spent only for what voters approve. If there is no built-in accountability, the SPLOST should be voted down.
2. Transparency. The ballot should list only specific projects, not some vague use like “water infrastructure.” If the ballot is vague, the SPLOST should be killed.
3. No new spending. Every government on the ballot should be required to spend a vast majority of SPLOST for debt reduction, not new projects or new spending. New projects create new costs that shows up as ongoing expenses in the budget. If debt payment isn’t the main expense, the SPLOST should be denied by voters in November.
If local governments would follow the intent of SPLOST — to pay for major capital projects that are approved by voters — then there probably wouldn’t be a problem. But local governments have abused the SPLOST in the past and there is no teeth in state law to hold them accountable.
Only voters have the power to make certain SPLOST isn’t abused by demanding greater accountability and, if necessary, voting down the entire proposal.
Defined tags for this entry: Editorial
I don't have an issue with Water/Sewer infrastructure or roads but some of this other stuff needs to come out before I would change my mind.
I guess that most people really ARE stupid enough to believe that the BOC and city governments aren't going to raise property taxes regardless of the approval of SPLOST.
And our elected officials in Jackson County know that this scare tactic has always worked in the past, so they are sure it will work this time too!
As for a revolt, puh-LEEZ!!! What a bunch of sheep we all are. The common, mundane, daily cheating that goes on in our government is not merely tolerated, its come to be expected as the norm. Revolt, indeed. A few angry words, a few complaints to the editor of the paper, a (VERY) few votes for the opposition at the next election is the sum of this "revolt", and if you don't think the county and city officials don't already know this to be true, you'd better wise up and think again.
No, there will be no revolt, and the SPLOST package WILL pass, because, for the most part, we will all go along quietly to the slaughter, just like we always have.
Baaaa....Baaaaaaaa.
You're absolutely right, property taxes will go up whether or not SPLOST is passed or not.
"either pass the SPLOST or we'll hike property taxes" THIS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A TERRORISTIC THREAT!
Wake up people, Jackson County politicians are no better than any other politicians. I have yet to meet an honest one. They MAY be honest when they first start, but once they learn the system...it's all over. If they are so intent on making our county better, why not just volunteer and not get paid?? Oh wait, they're in it for the money...nevermind.
I fear that if they don't get the message NOW our streets will begin to resemble those of Egypt's because they have pushed American's too far!