EDITORIAL: Not all tax 'savings' are responsible

It wasn’t so long ago that the county and cities deciding upon a 3% property tax increase, the most allowed by state law, would incur the wrath of the hordes.

“Tax and spend bureaucrats!” was the second most common refrain from furious factions. The most common? Well, that can’t be repeated in a family newspaper.

But times change. Many citizens accept modest annual tax increases with a shrug of the shoulders, so much sharper and more painful are the cuts from gas fill-ups and grocery store excursions inflicted far more frequently.

And some notice tax hikes only when their mortgage payments go up. At that point, residents go back to their property tax notices and check out the fine print: the list of how much each taxing entity is going to receive from you in the coming year.

Two things. One, if the elected bodies that set budgets based largely on your property taxes were to hear much more from their constituents, including during the public meetings each must hold before finalizing the next fiscal year’s budget, perhaps they would make different decisions. But that happens on such a small scale that it’s statistically insignificant.

And two, what those public servants do hear — a lot — is what taxpayers demand for their money.

More police to keep neighborhoods safe.

Better streets and roadways.

More parks.

Expanded hours for public access.

More firefighters for EMS services and shorter response times.

And on, and on, and on.

To provide everything their consumers think they need, local government decision makers could probably increase budgets 100% each year and still leave unhappy taxpayers in their wake. But there’s if not a happy ending to this tale, at least a moderately satisfactory one.

Because the tax base here has expanded thanks to adrenaline shots from new growth that greatly ease the burden on existing property owners, even 3% increases might not register on the personal finance Richter scale at all. Even with 3% bumps, your tax bill might not increase at all.

That’s why Kootenai County, Coeur d’Alene and others can take their full 3% and still sleep well at night: They’re scratching as many of the public’s itches as possible, within the realm of what’s reasonable.

But when an entity like the Community Library Network board majority declines to take any of the 3% increase, that may be more an indication of willingness to not fully serve their public than it is proof of fiscal responsibility. Diminished inventory, hours or programs is a heavy price to pay for the minuscule tax savings to each property owner.

So next time candidates proudly boast they supported no tax increases, look an inch or two below the surface. You might find there's much more to that story.