Pinthouse Pizza
Creative Taxation
RECEIVED Tue., Aug. 25, 2015
Dear Editor,
Regarding “What Do Austinites Want?” [News, Aug. 21], the overall point of the article is very well-taken. A majority of Austinites realizes that a quality of life which corresponds to the character of our city requires greater public investment, and they are willing to pay higher taxes if these funds are wisely spent on the common good. However, this doesn't apply across the board. At a recent meeting of the Springdale-Airport Neighborhood Association I was brought into direct contact with the negative effects of gentrification in East Austin. It was moving to hear longtimers in the neighborhood express their hospitable openness to the new families moving into the area. They genuinely welcome the new life that this brings to the community. On the other hand, however, they also expressed their pain that this development brings with it. They all know friends and relatives who have been forced out of the neighborhood, and many of them are themselves on the verge of having to leave – all because of the higher property taxes based on rising property values. These folks can't pay more even if they recognize that the investment would be worth it.
Lowering the overall assessment rate is an ineffective measure because it reduces the funds available to the city for improvements and doesn't offer significant relief to those who need it. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be possible to develop a more progressive basis of taxation based on a variety of factors besides property values, more nuanced than the present homestead and senior citizen exemptions, taking into consideration such factors as the owner's income, age, and years of residence at a particular address, etc. This would allow justifiable tax increases for those who want and can afford them, while at the same time protecting those who would be victimized by such increases. I can well imagine that state laws might hem in such attempts at creative taxation, but I can't see any other path toward an Austin that is livable for all its citizens.
Regarding “What Do Austinites Want?” [News, Aug. 21], the overall point of the article is very well-taken. A majority of Austinites realizes that a quality of life which corresponds to the character of our city requires greater public investment, and they are willing to pay higher taxes if these funds are wisely spent on the common good. However, this doesn't apply across the board. At a recent meeting of the Springdale-Airport Neighborhood Association I was brought into direct contact with the negative effects of gentrification in East Austin. It was moving to hear longtimers in the neighborhood express their hospitable openness to the new families moving into the area. They genuinely welcome the new life that this brings to the community. On the other hand, however, they also expressed their pain that this development brings with it. They all know friends and relatives who have been forced out of the neighborhood, and many of them are themselves on the verge of having to leave – all because of the higher property taxes based on rising property values. These folks can't pay more even if they recognize that the investment would be worth it.
Lowering the overall assessment rate is an ineffective measure because it reduces the funds available to the city for improvements and doesn't offer significant relief to those who need it. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be possible to develop a more progressive basis of taxation based on a variety of factors besides property values, more nuanced than the present homestead and senior citizen exemptions, taking into consideration such factors as the owner's income, age, and years of residence at a particular address, etc. This would allow justifiable tax increases for those who want and can afford them, while at the same time protecting those who would be victimized by such increases. I can well imagine that state laws might hem in such attempts at creative taxation, but I can't see any other path toward an Austin that is livable for all its citizens.
Michael Floyd