The Alliance of Concerned Taxpayers (ACT) is forging a partnership between the citizens and the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) government to promote sustainable fiscal policy. ACT has identified three major objectives:
1. To promote the financially efficient operation of all necessary KPB functions mandated under Alaska statutes; Title 29;
2. To promote citizen awareness and participation in the formulation of sustainable fiscal policy; and
3. To implement a plan that requires the KPB seek voter approval for the funding of major capital projects or changes in the type or rate of all taxes.
The next logical step in the above plan forced ACT to file a two-part complaint against the borough in Kenai Superior Court. Public interest litigation is one option for citizens, whenever elected officials appear to misinterpret the law.
The borough alleges that the Sales Tax Cap and Capital Projects Cap that passed by a majority vote in 2005 are somehow unlawful, even though they legally became law through the initiative process. The borough made several conscious decisions to ignore parts of these citizen enacted laws. The legal action taken by ACT seeks to correct what appears to be an unauthorized tax increase and violations of the Capital Projects Cap.
The first part of ACT’s complaint deals with the Sales Tax Cap issue. ACT has always held that any action by the borough to increase the sales tax rate without a public vote is clearly in violation of both the Sales Tax Cap and state statutes.
The second part of ACT’s complaint has to do with capital projects costing more than one million dollars. In 2005, borough voters lowered the limit from $1.5 million to $1 million. Any projects costing more than $1 million would require a public vote. Since that election, the assembly approved two major projects without the required vote. The majority of assembly members, relying on borough attorney Collette Thompson’s interpretation of law, gambled that a vote was not required.
ACT has no interest in stopping these or any future projects. Instead, a judgment handed down by the courts will give clarification to the borough, while providing voters the protection they sought by passing Prop 4 in 2005.
There are two issues and two opposing positions here. Both have attorneys willing to support their respective opinions. The time has come for an impartial referee who will listen to both sides and then make a binding decision based on the relevant law. A judge’s decision will mandate work direction for the administration and assembly to follow in future deliberations.
The borough must reply to the court summons by Jan. 23, 2007 (today). ACT hopes this complaint will be resolved promptly. A judgment will allow everyone to move on to the next issue. For the borough, it will be the new budget and raising more money to support it. For ACT, the next project is to put a total revenue cap on the October 2007 ballot.
Called ACT-CAP, this initiative will give voters the option of placing a revenue cap on the KPB similar to caps now in effect in the Matanuska-Susitna, Fairbanks and Anchorage boroughs. Anyone concerned about rapidly increasing property taxes will find protection under this proposed cap.
Without ACT-CAP, the borough is free to increase property tax without consulting anyone. ACT-CAP does not prevent future tax hikes, but it will require the borough to ask the public for that tax increase. ACT-CAP will also permit a realignment of taxes. Sales tax revenue, for example, could be increased by a public vote or by economic growth, but it would then force a corresponding reduction of property tax. ACT-CAP will ensure that the borough government can not grow faster than our economy. The ACT Web site, www.act-kpb.org, provides relevant background, original documents and links to other sources of information.
Initiatives put forward by ACT are all designed to give voters the choice to accept or reject expensive capital projects or new taxes. Voters are the taxpayers who pay the bills and the ACT plan gives them more voice in their local government. Without the ACT plan, only five people are needed to decide how much your next tax bill will be. Once the ACT plan has been fully implemented, taxpayers will again become a key component of the decision-making process.
ACT has been painted by many elected officials and some in the media as “bad” for local government. For too many years the “system” has been driving people away. ACT initiatives have brought people back to the voting booth, as recent election results prove. How can any freedom-loving supporter of representative government object to having the good people of this borough more involved in local government?
After everything is said and done, government belongs to all of us.
Mike McBride is the media spokesman for ACT.
Editorial