We all know that property taxes aren’t fair.
To start with, they are currently based on something completely out of the homeowner’s control: the assessed value of the property. (This is called “ad valorem” taxation.)
Things change in the neighborhood which can affect your property value, totally out of your control.
In my case, the owner of China Wok decided to buy a rundown building next door and turn it into an apartment complex. I have no doubt that this will raise the value of my home, and thereby my property tax burden.
People who bought a home in Bangor for $50,000 many years ago and just recently finished paying it off, now pay taxes on a $250-300,000 home. Such a home would have been considered a mansion in their day.
Some will say, “They should simply sell it.” And these people do not understand the spirit of one’s homestead. Not everyone looks at their home as some kind of investment. If anything, it’s a net negative, where you’re constantly putting money into it and never getting any back.
Moving on, property taxes do not take into account the homeowner’s ability to pay. The same homeowner who bought a $50,000 home and paid it off over 30 years now lives on social security retirement, which they paid into and earned. The property tax bill on a $300,000 home is around $300 per month, whereas the average social security check is just $2076. All the homeowner expenses remain, including maintenance and bills, and for elderly people, things like prescriptions. At this point, people are truly “paying rent to the government,” as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis puts it.
The Bangor property tax code makes no exceptions for anybody. If you write to a member of government about your tax burden, they direct you to the measly two state exemptions that exist: the homestead exemption and the veteran’s exemption, which combined will not significantly lower my property’s assessed value. If you own a home in Bangor, you know it doesn’t take very much for the assessor’s to say your home is worth $10,000 more than it was yesterday. And that’s a conservative estimate. The assessor can really say anything he or she wants. What are you going to do about it?
As City Councilor, after some time and some politicking, I intend to propose something which apparently has never been tried in the United States, as well as some things that have. Outnumbered by far by liberals who are quite content to just keep raising the mill rate and extracting more tax from our working-class homeowners, this is not going to be easy.
A Modest Proposal
I propose a “progressive” property tax system which will have some or all of the following elements.
However, the first principal of my property tax proposal is that the current mill rate at the time I take office will be the ceiling for everyone. Whether you own 50 homes or just 1, the maximum you should pay is the current rate.
But that brings to mind the first element of the new code: that those who own multiple properties will pay a higher rate on their secondary properties, graduating up to the current rate. On their homestead or first property, everyone will eventually, if I am successful, pay a new lower millage rate of $12.50 per $1,000 of value on their home. Second homes will pay 25% more, or $15.63. Third properties and beyond will pay the current rate of $17.70. We will hopefully be able to create some language in there that allows owners of multiple properties to freely designate which is their “homestead,” so they can choose their most valuable property as such.
Because while I am suggesting a “progressive” property tax system, it is hard to consider me myself a progressive. I am a Republican, and I want to be fair to the property owners who do contribute to this city by both paying their property taxes every year and providing places for renters to live.
The Short-Circuit Solution
Another thing we can consider as we discuss revamping the property tax code in Bangor is what’s called a “property tax short circuit.”
In such a provision, taxes are returned or reduced when they have reached a certain percentage of the homeowner’s income. This effectively caps the property tax rate at a certain amount of a homeowner’s income.
I think the most acceptable figure here would be 10% of the property owner’s total income. So for a retired widow earning just $2,076 per month from her social security check, the maximum property tax she could be liable for would be $208 per month, or $2,496 per year. This would be without regard to whether or not her property was worth millions on the market. There should be no external pressure, particularly by government forces, to coerce a homeowner to sell.
Proposed Exemptions
The City of Bangor should consider what people have done with their lives, and institute exemptions in addition to the state-funded exemptions.
Totally disabled veterans should pay no property taxes at all. Teachers, retired teachers, first responders (police, EMTs, and firefighters) and retired first responders should all receive a healthy exemption, at least 30% of their home’s overall value.
Bangor should also offer an in-kind homestead exemption of at least the same amount as the state one, because it is wrong to discourage homeowners to invest in their property and increase its value.
But How Will We Make Up The Difference?
Great question, reader. First of all, we should consider getting the government out of several areas it has no business in, including “cultural development” and “DEI initiatives” that are not state-mandated. Wherever these types of things cost money, we should cut back.
Secondly, we will reassess the total city budget, probably with the help of professional money managers, and identify where cuts can be made.
But these two measures will only do a little.
The best way to handle a property tax decrease is to expand the tax base and look at other ways we can acquire revenue.
I am just one man and I don’t have all the answers, but I know that if a portion of the city’s income were dedicated to something like an investment account, the city could see dividends in the millions with only limited investment.
The City of Bangor holds no Bitcoin, for example, whereas any smart investor today owns plenty of it. I’m just spitballing into the void here, but Bitcoin, just as an example, can be used as leverage in securing loans, and with the right management, it could eventually create a surplus of city funds.
There are other ways the city can create revenue. We could create a toll on a bridge, with Bangor residents being exempt to it. We could levy a 0.5% city sales tax on alcohol and marijuana. There are other use taxes which can make up any budget shortfall created by giving relief to homeowners in this city. We have to discuss, and explore, all of them before we make any decisions. As with all things, I am open to your feedback, Bangor resident. Write me at [email protected] or call/text 951-3685.
We have to investigate all the options to deliver real property tax relief to the residents. None of the things I’ve said in this article are set in stone because, again, I am just one man in a city of over 30,000.
But what you can say about me as a candidate, at least, is that I’m thinking outside of the box.
As City Councilor, I will never accept the easy answers first. I will do the research, speak to the experts, and look into every option before making any decisions. I will also measure each decision against the following metric: does this harm the working families of Bangor? If the answer is yes, I will not vote in favor of it, whatever it may be.