I love driving. I will slide behind the wheel whenever I can to cruise the roads and streets.

I respect police officers and firefighters, although I strive to avoid direct contact with them when they are working.

The City of Toledo ballot Issue 1 impacts roads and safety officials, although to what degree depends on who is quoting the statistics.

Issue 1 has become a source of contention between Toledo Mayor Carty Finkbeiner and Toledo City Council President Joe McNamara. The issue has a complicated backstory and unquestioned potential to define how public money will be spent in the city.

On Sept. 1, Toledo Free Press Publisher Tom Pounds met with Finkbeiner to hear the mayor’s take on Issue 1, which he supported as recently as Aug. 9, but now wants defeated. On Sept. 2, Pounds and I met with McNamara to hear his side of the issue.

Here is the basic history of Issue 1, mashed from Finkbeiner and McNamara’s testimony:

In 1982, Toledo voters approved the 3/4 percent “temporary” income tax, because we’re suckers for a chance to give our money away for the greater good. In that ballot language, the money was to be divided equally between police and fire, the general fund, and the Capital Improvement Fund (CIP), which is used to maintain infrastructure such as streets, bridges and parks.

For 22 years, Toledo chugged along with balanced budgets. A declining population (from 354,000 in 1980 to 332,943 by 1990 and 313,619 by 2000) and tightening resources led the city and then-Mayor Jack Ford, in 2004, to ask voters to change the allocation of the 3/4 percent “temporary” income tax. Under this new system, the general fund increased to 1/2 of the pie, police and fire maintained 1/3 and the CIP was cut to 1/6. This change was approved unanimously by council and voters. Keep in mind, the general fund can be used at council’s discretion to bolster the police and fire fund, but in general is not used for CIP.

In March 2008, taxpayers were asked to renew the 3/4 percent “temporary” income tax, because we’re apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of the word “temporary.” At that point, the tax was renewed (through 2012) using the previous (1982-2004) formula of equality: 1/3 each to fire and police, general fund and CIP. At that time, council, including McNamara, who had been on the Finance Committee less than 90 days, approved the retro language.

Now, just more than one year after that change, McNamara is leading the effort for Issue 1, to change the change back to the 2004 language, under which the general fund increases to 1/2 of the pie, police and fire maintain 1/3 and CIP is cut to 1/6.

Got that?

Finkbeiner is working local media hard to make his case against Issue 1. He describes it as “robbing Peter to pay John Block,” or something like that, and says it is “only being done because city council lacked the courage to balance the budget with recommended additions.”

Those “recommended additions” include ways to raise taxes or fees, which council seems to understand is a bad idea at a time of population exodus and 15 percent unemployment.

Finkbeiner says if Issue 1 passes, several crucial road resurfacings will be delayed, there will be “no money” for the New Schools New Neighborhoods program, and in 2010, 2011 and 2012, there would be zero CIP funds for residential resurfacing.

McNamara says that is an extreme “nightmare scenario” that would not happen because council and the next mayor (God bless him, whomever he is), would have yearly control and would not allow such a result. McNamara, who is running for re-election, concedes  that a smaller CIP budget means some infrastructure needs will not be met, but he believes police and fire protection are the pressing priorities (hence, the “Safety First” slogan for Issue 1).

If Issue 1 passes, $3.9 million set aside in the CIP fund could be used to balance the 2009 budget deficit. McNamara says passage would also prevent further police and fire layoffs, but Finkbeiner has vowed to avoid that if, as he desires, Issue 1 fails.

Whenever I have questions about Toledo financial issues, I try to talk to Councilman (and council candidate) George Sarantou, who has always been direct and honest with me about even the least pleasant budgetary questions. Sarantou has been on the Finance Committee for almost eight years, and has been its chairman for six years. Like McNamara, he once supported the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 plan, but now strongly supports Issue 1’s 1/2, 1/3, 1/6 split.

“When I backed the original plan, the economy was in better shape, and based on available data, we were confident the city would do well,” Sarantou said Sept. 2. “I changed my mind when the economy went so far south. We need the CIP to improve the general fund. We are in a fiscal emergency, and we would like permission from voters to use CIP funds for safety.”

Sarantou stresses that Toledo’s budget woes are a result of shrinking tax revenue, not reckless spending.

“In 2006, we earned about $165 million in income tax. It was $156 million in 2008 and will be $145 million in 2009,” Sarantou said. “That’s a $20 million swing to the negative in three years, a result of the deep depression in Toledo and the auto layoffs.”

Sarantou said as the economy improves and people get back to work, revenues will climb. He said once the economy stabilizes, he would support taking the 3/4 percent “temporary tax” back to its 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 division. That might be a nice present for the “temporary tax’s” 30-year anniversary.

McNamara and Sarantou say Finkbeiner is spreading “misinformation” on Issue 1, and both men say they were and are surprised by his Aug. 10 flip-flop on the issue.

McNamara said if there is cooperation on council and with the mayor, Issue 1 could offer a flexibility that would serve as a crucial tool as Toledo fights its way out of the economic slump. That theory holds true no matter who sits in the mayor’s seat and council president’s seat in January. But if a mayor wanted to hoard control of infrastructure and beautification funds without working closely with council, Issue 1 could be seen as an obstacle, especially if that mayor can’t envision life on the 22nd floor without himself in the corner office.

If you understand that, the flip-flop isn’t so surprising after all.

Michael S. Miller is editor in chief of Toledo Free Press. Contact him at mmiller@toledofreepress.com.

This entry was posted on Friday, September 4th, 2009 at 12:00 am and is filed under Lighting The Fuse, Opinion.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.