For the first time in America, a city has decided to tax churches. The village of Nome is failing. Revenues are down, costs are up. They can’t afford to allow free rides, much like many towns in the USA. So they’ve done the practical thing and called “enough”.
I doubt that this will snowball (heh), but it certainly should, IMO. It’s the longest running scam in the country and there is no good reason for it to continue. Churches and associated buildings take up huge chunks of prime real estate. While some may pay PILOTs, the vast majority pay zilch and the rest of us have to take up the slack.
If this should be in debates, feel free to move it.
This seems like the municipal equivalent of looking for loose change under the sofa cushions. Way too little, way too late. Look for a Chapter 9 bankruptcy in the near future.
Exactly right. This doesn’t outrage me, it amuses me. The amount of money this measure would add to Nome’s coffers is insignificant.
You want to make the First Nome Baptist Church pay sales tax on the toys they buy for local poor kids at Christmas? Go ahead. You wanna make St. Nanook’s parish pay sales tax on the coffee and doughnuts they serve after Mass? Go ahead. But please don’t imagine you’re going to have billions floating in as a result.
Not exactly a nitpick - the council has not decided this, yet.
And Nome has tried something like this before (cite), and it didn’t work out.
Keeping in mind that this proposal taxes all non-profits, not just churches. Any selective enforcement is going to run afoul of the First Amendment sooner rather than later.
Still, a non-profit, pretty much by definition, is not exactly rolling in money. Sure there are a few mega-churches that abuse this designation, but I doubt you’ll find too many such institutions in Nome, AK. No, this is the city looking for loose change in the sofa cushions.
You are certainly correct that this won’t raise any significant money, even if it passes (and holds up to review, which it won’t). Even one of the council members (I believe) was talking about giving the money back, maybe, if they raised enough revenue from other sources.
I suspect this is more or less a trial balloon, spawned of desperation.
I think there are a lot of Native Alaskan non-profits (Aleut or Inuit or whatever the correct term is). Might this be aimed at them?
Like I say, I have no idea if this will fly or not, but the notion that “Nome is taxing churches” is a little incomplete, and will (if enacted) have a larger footprint than might be expected.
To be fair, I have no idea if those pushing this tax know either.
The odd thing to me, was that the article said the tax would raise $300,000 on non-profits in a city of 3,800. That’s $80 a person. With a sales tax of 5%, that’s $1600 a person going to these non-profits. That is either quite low or quite high depending on how you feel about tithing.
I was speaking of the country in general, smart guy. And it’s not about the land, it’s about the occupants who get a free ride.
Some Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) do have a lot of money. When I worked for Arctic Slope Regional Corporation about ten years ago, it was a $6 billion enterprise, with a boatload of subsidiaries. Profits are supposed to be shared with the shareholders, who consist of every Native person who lives in the borough that is represented by the corporation. That doesn’t translate to money for the community, only for the individual, so in most of the villages and towns people are still shitting in buckets and outhouses.
It is, of course, a desperation move, and likely won’t make much difference in the quality of life. But Alaska is not the only place with these sorts of problems. Here in Oregon, there are towns that have no full time police department, and counties that are emptying the jails because there is no operating money. Most cities have budgetary issues, including Portland, but they still persist in honoring a tradition that needs to die. There are at least five churches within a quarter mile of my house, one of which is a huge Catholic operation that takes up a couple of city blocks. They all use city water, sewer, electricity and streets, but don’t pay a nickel for the upkeep. Meanwhile, the city keeps hitting up every other property owner for more money.
This is only “the first time in America” for a city, but we have whole states that already “tax churches” including the state of Washington.
So… whoop-dee-doo, Nome. Your not-even-a-line-item-in-the-budget tax measure is only new in terms of how totally insignificant your stupid city is. Way to stick it to the man.
Quite frankly what I see as worse is when cities give tax exemptions and TIF to businesses. Their was one guy who used TIF money to renovate a historic downtown KC hotel. When the renovation was done he sold the hotel and kept all the money.