Thanks for this rundown, Jason; as always, your explanations are detailed and helpful. One quick question--it looks like the Local Ad Valorem Tax Reduction Fund is fated to be completely abolished, rather than just unfunded and ignored, as has been the case for the past quarter-century. I've been persuaded by those city and county officials who have pushed for it's revival (here: https://mittelpolitan.substack.com/p/insight-kansas-column-for-january); did it have any champions in the legislature? Were you one? (Don't worry, I'll keep supporting you even if your answer is no.)
Thanks. Professor Fox. I did and do support funding of LATVRF. The arguments that the funding to counties hadn’t been used to offset property taxes was laughable to me. It hadn’t been funded in 20 years. How would anyone know how it’s been used? The legislature hadn’t allowed it play out for two decades. I think LATVRF is good way to reduce property taxes, especially in areas with a smaller tax base - which tend to have more upward pressure on mill levies. But there was little hope the ruling party was going to fund it anytime in the near future, so shifting to some form of tax relief that is broad based seemed like a good option in a moment when there is money and a desire to cut taxes.
I appreciate the response, Jason. Do you think your opinion is shared by the Democratic leadership--that is, that pushing broad based tax relief, such as is reflected in the bill on the governor's desk, is the best alternative given current realities? I haven't see people like Sawyer (who I also think is a smart and responsible legislator and worthy of support) going out of their way to defend the LATVRF, for example.
I have defended the LAVTRF for years. Minority Leader Vic Miller is also a strong supporter of LAVTRF. Trying to get if funded just seems impossible right now. Many Republicans don't believe the money will be used for property tax relief.
Thanks for the correction, Tom; I should have been aware of your past support, and I apologize for implying otherwise in my previous comment. I should have been clear that I was only speaking of this most recent cycle, which is one I've been most focused on.
Thanks for this rundown, Jason; as always, your explanations are detailed and helpful. One quick question--it looks like the Local Ad Valorem Tax Reduction Fund is fated to be completely abolished, rather than just unfunded and ignored, as has been the case for the past quarter-century. I've been persuaded by those city and county officials who have pushed for it's revival (here: https://mittelpolitan.substack.com/p/insight-kansas-column-for-january); did it have any champions in the legislature? Were you one? (Don't worry, I'll keep supporting you even if your answer is no.)
Thanks. Professor Fox. I did and do support funding of LATVRF. The arguments that the funding to counties hadn’t been used to offset property taxes was laughable to me. It hadn’t been funded in 20 years. How would anyone know how it’s been used? The legislature hadn’t allowed it play out for two decades. I think LATVRF is good way to reduce property taxes, especially in areas with a smaller tax base - which tend to have more upward pressure on mill levies. But there was little hope the ruling party was going to fund it anytime in the near future, so shifting to some form of tax relief that is broad based seemed like a good option in a moment when there is money and a desire to cut taxes.
I appreciate the response, Jason. Do you think your opinion is shared by the Democratic leadership--that is, that pushing broad based tax relief, such as is reflected in the bill on the governor's desk, is the best alternative given current realities? I haven't see people like Sawyer (who I also think is a smart and responsible legislator and worthy of support) going out of their way to defend the LATVRF, for example.
I have defended the LAVTRF for years. Minority Leader Vic Miller is also a strong supporter of LAVTRF. Trying to get if funded just seems impossible right now. Many Republicans don't believe the money will be used for property tax relief.
Thanks for the correction, Tom; I should have been aware of your past support, and I apologize for implying otherwise in my previous comment. I should have been clear that I was only speaking of this most recent cycle, which is one I've been most focused on.