Topeka — A legislative committee on Tuesday approved a bill that would give voters an opportunity to decide whether a local governing body could increase property taxes by more than the rate of inflation.
The 13-7 vote by the House Taxation Committee sent the measure to the full House for consideration.
The bill recommended by the committee was much different than what was initially proposed.
Originally, House Bill 2630 would have required an election if a governing body wanted to collect more in tax revenue than the previous year.
But the bill was amended to allow a protest petition if the governing body proposed a tax increase more than the Consumer Price Index. If 5 percent of qualified voters signed a petition to protest the increase, then an election would have to be held on the issue.
State Rep. Jeff King, R-Independence, said his amendment was an attempt to offer a compromise that would give taxpayers a right to protest tax increases, while not usurping the role of local governments.
State Rep. Steve Brunk, R-Bel Aire, who authored the original bill, said he was glad to see the committee advance the measure, but was opposed to the changes.
“It makes it more complicated,” Brunk said. “The whole point was to keep it simple,” he said.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
jrlii (anonymous) says…
Not bad, but I'd rather see budgets capped like Robert Docking did, instead of tax rates.
Not to mention, some folks will vote for a tax with any plausible reason. . .
The state should act to restrict the authority of local units to spend money, 'cause they greatly increased their spending while property values were escalating, and now that they have stagnated or declined, they are loath to stop the various extraneous activities they started during good times.
Centerville (anonymous) says…
The state should stay out of it. Just like the fed should not "act to restrict the authority of local units [states]."
Locals can figure out what to cut.
texburgh (anonymous) says…
Why should we get to vote on tax increases but Brunk opposes letting us vote on corporate welfare? They hand out corporate welfare like candy. Why can't we vote on eliminating the estate tax? That tax cut applied to 900 Kansas millionaires and the rest of us are paying for it with school cuts or social service cuts. This is simple proof of Brunk's real agenda - get rid of all services to citizens, privatize it all. Stop all tax increases while giving out massive corporate tax cuts and tax cuts for the wealthy. In Brunk's world, when you call 911, you will be linked to a private fire department and will get a recorded message like this, "All of our operators are now busy. Please hold for the next available firefighter. For faster service, have your credit card ready."