If that's diversification, I'm a monkey's landlord

Frontiersman editorial board

The Mat-Su Borough jumped onto the Frank Murkowski "user fee" bandwagon Wednesday, instituting a real estate transfer fee some simply say is a tax on property exchange.

Although it's hard to argue the borough needs to cultivate new sources of revenue beyond property taxes, there are a few aspects of this fee, and its introduction, that raise questions.

The fee was put forward for discussion after years of seemingly idle talk around the assembly table about diversifying revenue. "We need to find new sources of revenue," assembly members have said. "Let's reduce the burden on property owners."

While this fee is a new source of revenue, it's stretching the truth to call it "diversification." People who don't own property still won't contribute to the cost of fixing roads, running schools or paying for animal care.

To be fair, the assembly has tried to bring about a sales tax that would target those individuals, but voters have agreed several times in the past decade that a sales tax was not wanted. Voters may get a chance to make their opinion known at the voting booth this October, as the assembly will consider in June placing a one-percent sales tax and a severance tax on gravel on the ballot.

While it's doubtful adding a $200 fee to the cost of buying a home will deter prospective homeowners from building new or purchasing existing homes in the Valley, those who testified at the Wednesday afternoon meeting raised valid questions about the fast-tracked ordinance.

Although statutes regarding public notice requirements were upheld, the assembly sought to incorporate the funds generated by the new fee into this year's budget. To do so, the measure had to be approved before the budget was adopted -- which must be done by May 31. As a result, as Borough Finance Director Tammy Clayton told the assembly, borough staff rushed to compile the ordinance in two days. Some aspects of the new fee, such as how it would be implemented, were still being determined Wednesday and will continue to be ironed out over the coming weeks.

The rushed implementation of the ordinance left some real estate brokers understandably upset, as it appeared to skirt the public process. Although the public process was adhered to, as we are learning with politics of late, it's the appearance of impropriety that lingers in people's minds.

As the assembly begins discussions about other new sources of revenue or increased fees, we hope they hold to their standard practice of well-publicized public hearings, held at the same times public hearings have been held in the Valley for years.