Now
Fair
32°
High
42°
Low
15°

Beutler says save jail money

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By DEENA WINTER / Lincoln Journal Star

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 - 04:45:33 pm CST

Mayor Chris Beutler said the city should save the $1.4 million that will be freed up in its budget next year when the city starts taxing citizens to help pay for a new county jail.

On Monday, the City Council will vote on whether to issue bonds to jointly finance the $65 million jail.

The vote is largely procedural, however, since the council already unanimously approved  creating a joint public agency to finance the jail, which would reduce financing costs.

Under the agreement with the county, the city no longer will have to pay the county $1.4 million annually to house city prisoners. That frees up $1.4 million in the municipal budget, unless the city lowers its tax levy to make up for the shift.

Beutler held a press conference Thursday to lobby for the tax levy to be left alone and the money to be saved, not spent on new programs. He warned the cushion will be needed given the nationwide recession, somewhat stagnant city sales tax revenue and uncertainty about the effect of 2009 property revaluations. (If city property values go down, the city will get less property tax revenue.)

“If property valuations stagnate or show an overall decline in value, that could mean hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in losses to the city’s general fund,” Beutler said. “We cannot risk creating a huge deficit in this year’s budget or next year’s.”

He said special interest groups should resist the temptation to spend the money previously spent on prisoners.

“Others will try to argue that the money is a windfall that we can use to reduce our levy,” Beutler said. “But they won’t tell you that their levy reduction will certainly require very undesirable additional budget cuts to cover those reductions in the future.”

Coby Mach disagrees with Beutler’s take.

“I don’t understand how that could be so,” said Mach, head of the Lincoln Independent Business Association. “If we no longer have to pay the $1.4 million, then $1.4 million is now freed up.”

LIBA first raised the issue of what the city would do about the freed-up money in late August. While the group has not yet taken an official position, Mach said LIBA typically supports reducing or holding the tax rate flat.

“At this point, we would like to see the City Council strongly consider reducing our levy by $1.4 million,” he said.

Beutler said if sales tax revenue remains flat this year, the city will be looking at about a $1.5 million budget deficit.

When property tax statements go out later this month, Lincoln taxpayers will see two new line items for the jail: City Joint Public Agency and County Joint Public Agency.

Beutler said those line items don’t represent a tax increase or higher spending by the city because the city no longer has to pay $1.4 million to house prisoners.

Again, Mach disagreed with Beutler’s assessment. He said the only way the money shift is revenue-neutral is if the levy is reduced accordingly.

Beutler said leaving the tax rate alone would help the city end its budget’s “structural imbalance” if city leaders cast an “eye toward the future instead of an eye to the past.”

Councilman Ken Svoboda said Beutler was being “somewhat disingenuous” in saying it wouldn’t be a tax increase to use the excess money that results from what he calls a “tax shift.”

“Unless we credit the taxpayers for the $1.4 million in their property tax (bill) … it is a tax increase,” he said. “It’s a tax that they have not been paying in the past.”

He said he’d support reducing the city tax rate. If the city faces another shortfall next year, he said, the council will deal with it.

“When times are tough, you do the best you can to economize,” Svoboda said.

He said Beutler is “playing with fire” by wanting to keep the cash, levy a new jail tax and ask taxpayers to pay for a new arena next year.

Councilman Dan Marvin said the whole conversation is a bit premature.

“We’ll all deal with the budget starting in May of next near,” he said. “It’s kind of hard to stake out a position at this stage of the game.”

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
roger wrote on December 4, 2008 12:33 pm:
" Coby is right, we should get our savings in the decrease in tax levy. "

PLease wrote on December 4, 2008 1:01 pm:
" A reduction in fees will be replaced by a tax or levy from Lancaster County and the city for the cost of the new jail. I see no savings in this at all. Why does our Mayor think that the 1.4 million should remain in the budget. That is like saying I had a debt and the bank took it over and gave me the equity from the debt but I still owe the debt. Who's balancing the budget at city hall, it surely isn't someone from an accounting background is it. Sure the city would have less cost but the tax payers will still have the same cost, because now the cost goes to the county which in turn sends the bill to the property owner. WOW! thats what I call creative finance. "

Unhappy wrote on December 4, 2008 1:02 pm:
" If you increase the tax bills for the jail and don't reduce the levy for
the $1.4 million, then that can't be revenue neutral!! If you leave the
levy as is which compensates for the $1.4 million and then add more tax
for the jail, your increasing the taxes! However, if assessed values
don't go down, its crookedness compounded with more crookedness. Because
of my neighbor's exact same house sold for $60,000 less than what both
of ours were assessed for, I'm getting taken to the cleaners big time,
and I was even before this downturn, but the crooked assessor decided to
stick the knife in and turn it good, even though I had proper documentation and pictures. I have NO respect for any leaders of Lincoln. "

Carl wrote on December 4, 2008 1:02 pm:
" That's funny, the city property values will never go down, even if real local property values have gone down an average of 17% as cited in other areas of the local media, there is no way in heck the assessor would ever lower your assessed value to match it. "

simular wrote on December 4, 2008 1:37 pm:
" This is like when I buy something on sale and save $100.00. I don't have the savings in my pocket to spend elsewhere.

More than likely the Mayor will find a pet project to spend it on later. Stop and think about this 1.4 million a year for 20 years that's 20 million, nice pot of money. Maybe it will help with the Arena "

Kevin wrote on December 4, 2008 1:45 pm:
" I can see Beutler's point, but "Unhappy" is correct. The $1.4 million isn't a gift over and above, it's funds that were previously set aside for an expense that no longer exists. Therefore, taxpayers either need to be credited the amount, or we're essentially being taxed for the same thing twice. "

Sean1 wrote on December 4, 2008 2:00 pm:
" Once a politicians gets his hand in you pocket you can never, ever get it out. "

Mat wrote on December 4, 2008 4:11 pm:
" It's funny how it never even occurs to these people that once the reason that a tax was collected is no longer around that a government should stop collecting that tax. They just try to figure out the best way to spend the money. "

Im Amazed wrote on December 4, 2008 4:19 pm:
" Save IT, thats a good one. How about let's figure out how to spend this windfall. A new Arena perhaps or a new even bigger park, or about paying back the 2015 group for their expenses,the choices are endless. Save it will never happen. "

Im Amazed wrote on December 4, 2008 5:02 pm:
" Save IT, thats a good one. How about let's figure out how to spend this windfall. A new Arena perhaps or a new even bigger park, or about paying back the 2015 group for their expenses,the choices are endless. Save it will never happen. "

Mark wrote on December 4, 2008 5:16 pm:
" Here we go again on this issue of "the jail." My understanding about the existing jail was/is when the contractor built our current jail it was constructed in such a way that the current jail could be added onto. They said they could use the property on the south parking lot. They said they could/would make a lower level parking area for county/city employees and on top of that build up and then join the new structure to the existing building. I still do not understand why the city council and the Mayor want to build a new structure so far away. The next thing that will happen will be the added cost of having to transport prisoners to and from court. Furthermore, it is my understanding that since the powers that be wanted that property on west "O" st. and payed (in my opinion) an excessive, unnecessary, and inflated costs at commercial property rates. What I want to know is who in the city councial is gonna make bank on this. The county/city already owns the property south of the existing jail: Why do they refuse to use that property? All it does now is to serve as a free place to park for all the county/city employees. Waste, waste waste. "

russell wrote on December 4, 2008 6:47 pm:
" Money has to be found to build new streets and repair the current ones. Those persons that want 'tax cuts' please identify where the street money will be found or id the streets you do not want widen. Our water and sewer system is funded by a tax called 'water rate increase' but Lincoln does not have 'street rate increase' tax. "

Spam wrote on December 5, 2008 8:21 am:
" You could buy a lot of Spam for 1.4 million times the 20 or so years of the bond issue. "

Lincoln Taxpayer wrote on December 5, 2008 1:14 pm:
" Russell
The money should be in the system all ready but I think they wasted it on stuff like studies for a unneeded arena and the over priced ditch known as antelope valley. If the local government would take care of what is needed NOW and forget about these pipe dreams we might be a little better off, tax wise. "