Put It In Writing
Dawson said controversial measure was off the table but testifiers, Senators want to see it in writing
If Commissioner of Finance Angel Dawson thought a quick statement would make the 2007 property tax sale issue disappear, he was sadly mistaken.
Beginning with three testifiers from the VI Unity Day Group, and continuing throughout a morning of testimony before the Legislature’s Committee of the Whole that focused on the property tax issues facing the Virgin Islands, the message was the same – Put it in writing.
The VI Unity Day Group is an organization whose most recent visibility is an ongoing public campaign against the Administration’s plan to begin to collect property taxes. The group held a meeting this week on St. John as part of a public awareness campaign.
No property taxes have been collected since 2006 as the Administration has chosen not to collect any taxes pending the resolution of a court case on the issue. The court gave the Government permission to collect taxes at the 1998 rate pending settlement of the suit. The Government chose not to do so until recently, when the decision to collect taxes at the 1998 rate was made.
Part of the tax plan was a provision that would have allowed the Governor to sell the 2007 tax receivables to a third party, immediately receive the estimated $50 million in revenue those receivables are worth, and pay back the third party as the taxes were collected. This spawned concerns in the community that property would be at risk of being confiscated by a third party.
At the very end of his presentation seeking approval for an additional 250 million in borrowing authorization, Dawson mentioned, almost casually, that a decision had been made about the controversial property tax proposal.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Loreli Monsanto, president of the VI Unity Day Group, began her testimony by pointing out that the written bill that was in front of the Senate on still contained the language concerning the 2007 tax sale, and that there was no document reversing that language that had been submitted to support Dawson’s words.
Monsanto said the current fiscal crisis was made more severe by the Administration’s practice of basing its budget requests on anticipated revenues from the contested rates related to the property tax assessments by the firm Bearing Point. She added that the Government’s decision not to send out tax bills at the 1998 level is at the root of the problem.
She asked the Senate to look at the requested borrowing and the tax situation closely before taking any action, and reiterated Senate President Louis Patrick Hill’s earlier proposal to have a summit of all government agencies before any more borrowing is approved.
She also challenged Dawson’s account of cost-cutting measures the Administration has taken to address the financial issues facing the territory.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Myrtle Barry, chairperson for the real property tax committee for VI Unity Day Group, said the Government could take some lessons from the way the private sector is managing during the recession. She reiterated her discomfort with the Administration’s request to borrow more money.
She also expressed her concern that an item as critical as the consideration of sale of the 2007 taxes was communicated verbally by Dawson and had not been officially submitted to the Legislature for Wednesday’s hearing.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
She went on to express her concerns about the amount of authority the bill gives to the Governor to borrow money.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
She also cautioned that to continue down a path continued borrowing will weaken the Territory’s position if the economy fails to improve and that the Government needs to begin to operate in “survival mode.”
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Bishop Darryl Williams, Church of the Apostle’s Doctrine, chastised the Legislature for approving a request of the Governor to send out tax bills based on the Bearing Point document, in opposition to the court injunction; the imbalance between the tax benefits to large business compared to the tax burden of the local population; and the borrowing latitude proposed for the Governor in the bill before the Senate. These inequities for current and future residents of the Territory were a primary concern.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
And he ended by cautioning the Senators that they need to get back in touch with those they represent, as patience with the ongoing fiscal burden is getting short.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
The session was still in process at this writing.
I get disturbed when I hear people making reference to cutting the size of the Senate as a solution to budgeting cuts and spending reduction.
We sometimes based our solutions to problems emotionally. Think rationally and tell me. By reducing our senate how is this going to cut cost?
A. Senators would have to hire additional staff due work volume increase.
B. Senators would need bigger office space, which will require additional cost of remolding offices.
C. (This my biggest concern) Are we willing to put so much power in the hands of fewer senators. I am not comfortable with having fewer senators deciding for me. We open up to more corruption and the ability to buy off our future.
To Do we ever think things through:
That may be the case, but as least most of those senators would be doing actual work. Also, they need to pressure them into cutting their own salaries.
I have never advocated a reduction in the SIZE of the senate….
although others may have done so.
My recommendation (as it relates to the reducing of the overall
cost of government) has been the reduction in the salary of senators and staff.
@ Crab
I was not referring to you, I read your blogs probably more than others and agree with you more than not.
It scares me when we are not thinking rational. How could reducing representation and leaving it up to a few to determine our future is such a great solution.
Wow what power your given them. I think not.
You mean it scares you when someone presents a point of view that differs from yours. Reducing the number of senators does not reduce your representation in government. All it does is reduce expenses and change the ratio of representatives to citizens. To think of Senators as power brokers is a dangerous thing. They are merely elected representatives of the voting populus.
Oh boy,the games that are being played.
When I left government in the mid 80′s it was already having difficulty meeting its payroll and other obligations.
Then came Governor Farrelly who,despite the economic woes,opened the floodgates by drastically raising salaries for department heads and other executive officers from the mid $30,000s to $65,000,and which has since escalated to $85,000.
The problem is; revenues were not increased to the same extent nor was waste,fraud and mismanagement curtailed.
How can any government balance its budget given those set of conditions?
@ Administrator:
Unless I’m losing my mind the comment posted by ‘AMY’ on April 18,@ 7.17 pm,was written and posted by YOURS TRULY on April 15 @
9.29.
What’s going on here? Why would CIF allow anyone to to high jack
another blogger’s post and post it as their own?
@ Soldier
While that may have occurred and if so it is unfortunate we do not monitor comments to that level of scrutiny. Feel free to point it out, however, if you feel it has happened to you.
We face the same issue with those who “hijack” or duplicate another bloggers screen name. Again, we have asked people to notify us but it is not something we can control.
Thank you.
Dear ‘Amy’:
You obviously want to have a chat and be heard so why not begin by telling us what was it about my April 15th post that made you want to plagiarize it and post it as your own? There must be a reason.
Please let us hear from you.
The one and only…..
‘Crab’