Property taxes seem to be the low-hanging fruit

Coeur d'Alene.

Post Falls.

Kootenai County.

Shoshone County.

The Coeur d'Alene School District.

What do these cities, counties and the school district have in common?

They all want to raise property taxes.

More specifically, they want to raise your property taxes.

Why?

Because, according to local officials, costs keep climbing. Labor costs are up. Materials are up. Utilities are up. Fuel is up. Insurance is up. Virtually every line item in a government budget is more expensive than it was a few years ago.

As a result, taxpayers are once again being asked to provide more money.

To be clear, there is nothing inherently wrong with government leaders making that case. Their responsibility is to deliver essential services, maintain infrastructure, operate schools, and ensure budgets remain balanced. When expenses outpace revenues, they must find a way to close the gap.

The concern is not that elected officials are asking for more money.

The concern is that raising property taxes has increasingly become the default answer.

What was once viewed as a last resort now often appears to be the first option. Each year brings another proposed increase, another request to levy the maximum amount allowed by law, another explanation that the increase is relatively modest, the price of a cup of coffee, and will cost the average homeowner only a few dollars a month.

Individually, those increases may seem insignificant. Collectively, however, they add up.

Homeowners do not experience property taxes one increase at a time. They experience the cumulative effect. A few dollars here and a few dollars there eventually becomes hundreds or even thousands of dollars over the course of several years. 

At a time when families are already paying more for groceries, healthcare, insurance, fuel and housing, many are finding it harder and harder to absorb yet another increase, no matter how small officials claim it may be.

The reality is that local governments enjoy a funding mechanism that most individuals and private businesses do not have.

When a family budget falls out of balance, there is no public hearing where homeowners can vote to increase a neighbor's contribution. When a small business faces rising costs, the owner cannot send customers a larger bill and expect no resistance. Difficult choices have to be made. Spending is reduced. Projects are delayed. Positions go unfilled. Efficiencies are sought.

Government should be willing to demonstrate the same discipline.

That's why Coeur d'Alene Finance Director Katie Ebner deserves credit for proposing measures that would reportedly save approximately $1.16 million through hiring delays and postponing certain projects. Whether one agrees with every detail or not, that approach reflects an important principle: before asking taxpayers for more money, government should demonstrate that it has examined ways to spend less.

And that's really the issue at the heart of this debate.

Taxpayers are generally generous. North Idaho residents have repeatedly shown a willingness to support schools, public safety, roads, parks and other community priorities. In many cases, proposed property tax increases face little opposition. Few even question tax hikes these days. Citizens understand that services cost money.

What they want in return is confidence that every effort has been made to control spending before government reaches for their wallets again.

We agree that property tax increases may sometimes be necessary. But they should not become routine.

If local governments continue to rely too heavily on annual tax increases as part of their financial planning, they risk exhausting the patience of the very people they serve.