The city of Springfield has a budget for fiscal year 2019, and
the residents of Springfield have inherited a bouquet of new tax increases. But
that additional revenue likely won’t be enough to balance the budget.
Following weeks of dispute and uncertainty, Springfield City Council convened
Feb. 20 for a vote on Mayor Jim Langfelder’s proposed budget with additional
spending cuts. Lawmakers passed the mayor’s budget by a 10-1 vote.
The budget proceedings dovetailed with another vote: a revived sales tax hike
proposal rejected by aldermen weeks earlier. Aldermen approved the sales tax
hike this time, bringing residents’ combined state and local sales tax rate to
8.75 percent from 8.5 percent, pushing the burden above the state average.
This wasn’t the only tax increase lawmakers have passed in an effort to shore up
city finances, however. City lawmakers approved an increase in the city’s
telecommunication tax last month, raising the levy to 6 percent from 4 percent,
as well as an expansion in the hotel-motel tax to include short-term room
rentals through digital lodging services such as Airbnb.
But revenues from the recent tax measures, combined with an additional $3.7
million in cuts and a dip into the city’s emergency fund, failed to close
Springfield’s budget shortfall. City Budget Director Bill McCarty still
anticipated a possible $4 million deficit, according to The State
Journal-Register.
Langfelder has proposed a 4 percent tax on natural gas to address the lingering
deficit.
Taxpayers already shouldering a heavy burden
Springfield lawmakers have been testing taxpayers’ financial endurance since
well before the City Council’s latest marathon of tax hikes. Property taxes have
weighed heavily on residents of Springfield.
[to top of second column] |
A home in Springfield listed around $127,000 –
slightly above the county’s median home value – owed more than
$2,600 in property taxes in 2017.
These property tax revenues flowed to 10 different
units of local government, including Springfield Public School
District 186, the Springfield Park District and the city of
Springfield. One-hundred percent of the amount paid to the city went
toward government-worker pensions. Even then, this appropriation and
others have proven incapable of taming the city’s unfunded
retirement liabilities.
Fragile finances
The medley of tax proposals surrounding the passage of the city’s
budget is a testament to Springfield’s fragile fiscal condition.
Standing in the shadow of an $11.4 million deficit, lawmakers are
desperate for new sources of revenue as government-worker pension
costs balloon. And with the city’s credit rating in decline,
borrowing is starting to look like an increasingly risky option.
In 2016, Moody’s Investor Services downgraded the city’s credit
rating two notches, citing “considerable growth” in pension
liabilities, according to The State Journal-Register. The agency had
noted that, over the course of a year, unfunded pension obligations
had grown by more than $200 million, to $707 million in 2016 from
$503 million in 2015.
A subsequent report issued by Moody’s in 2018 reinforced the cause
for alarm. The report, released Jan. 11, reasserted the city’s
downgraded rating, this time revising the account’s outlook from
“stable” to “negative.”
Rather than hiking taxes in response to spiraling deficits,
lawmakers need to address what causes such deficits in the first
place. Absent structural spending reform, Springfield’s credit
rating only risks sliding further, therefore driving up the cost of
debt – and further squeezing taxpayers.
Click here to respond to the editor about this article |