Blytheville leaders have a golden opportunity to rebuild the trust of their constituents.
It seems likely that the IRS debt will be satisfied before the temporary 1-cent tax ends, leaving a potential surplus of $460,000 or more that can only be used for payroll taxes.
So, why not call a special election to end the tax early, instead of allowing it to collect the full 15 months?
Leaders have never been shy about calling for special elections in the past -- and voters have generally supported those taxes for special purposes, i.e. police and fire, parks and recreation and infrastructure.
If given the opportunity, I'd dare say they would vote in favor of ending the 1-cent tax early as well.
After all, since it can only be used for payroll taxes, allowing the IRS tax to continue when the debt is paid off means those tax funds will be the source for regular payroll taxes, not just the delinquent ones.
According to the Finance and Purchasing Committee chairman, Councilman Tommy Abbott, the city owes the IRS $1,027,173.54 as of June 1; the original debt was $3,822,990.39.
The 1-cent tax has generated $2,095,534.95 since it started in July, averaging about $231,925 per month.
If projections hold true, the debt should be satisfied following the September collections. According to the city's tax attorney, William Fones, there should be two months worth of surplus funds after it is paid off.
The night the tax passed, Mayor James Sanders said if the IRS lowers the debt, the city would have to go back to the voters with a new draft to rescind the ordinance already in place.
The IRS did indeed lower the debt, knocking off more than $700,000 in penalties. Later, the tax collections began to exceed original projections. Still, no word, no further discussion of a special election shortening the tax.
The city's financial state went from doom and gloom to having excess funds, at least regarding the payroll tax issue.
Now, I get that the general fund is sputtering along and an infusion of a few hundred thousand dollars would be a nice boost to getting it to the position that better supports the city departments that depend on it. And I have no doubt that city leaders could find legitimate, justifiable reasons to spend the extra cash.
However, the people passed a tax for a specific purpose and that purpose only. Respect their wishes. I don't think that's too much to ask of those who took an oath to look after citizens' best interests.
It's sort of like when leaders lamented the need for a new fire station as they campaigned for the police and fire tax -- and four years later there is still an empty lot.
Of course, some might argue an election would be too costly and make no financial sense for the city.
There may not be enough time to put on an election, they might argue.
But if a special election is possible and costs are reasonable, it would be a breath of fresh air in an otherwise polluted political climate. If for no other reason, officials should think of the political equity they could cash in during the next election.
Unfortunately, a special election asking for the 1-cent tax to be permanent is more likely than one calling for it to be removed early.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if local leaders have already entertained the thought of a permanent tax. The mayor and Council would be better served being the leadership that lightens the burden on the people -- the very ones who bailed them out of the IRS situation by taxing themselves.
That's long overdue.
mbrasfield@blythevillecourier.com