I want to discuss the reports made by city $taff regarding the phone tax, so get a cup of stiff java and a couple of toothpicks to prop your eyes open. I know the language in these documents is thicker than Glenn County fog, but it really helps to go over this stuff a little bit at a time and discuss it. All the sudden you gonna find yourself waking up real fast, Honey.
$taff refers to this resolution as an “update” or “modernization” of the old ordinance, by which they siphoned hundreds of thousands of dollars off us through our phone bills. The old law, apparently, only allowed the taxing of LAND LINES. Tuesday night, Ann Schwab, Andy Holcombe, Jim Walker and Scott Gruendl directed $taff to “modernize” the ordinance to include “interstate and international calls, voice over internet protocol, text messaging and paging. “
“Modernize“? Excuse me?
City Attorney Lori Barker says in her report, “These measures have the effect of modernizing an existing tax to ensure that all users of communication services are treated the same, regardless of the type of technology they are using or billing practices employed by their providers. ”
Here’s where it gets deceptive, and ugly. “…all users…are treated the same…” They are trying to pit us against each other, plain and simple. They are telling the land line users that the rest of us are getting by without paying our fair share!
First the ugly stick, then the carrot: “a slight decrease in the (current utility) tax rate, for example, from 5% to 4.5%.”
So, they’re telling the voters they will not only get the slackers to pay, but that they are LOWERING THE TAX.
Read along in the report and you see why: “Decreasing the rax rate most likely increases voter support of such measures.”
Wow, they must think we’re pretty easy – half a cent? We all know, that half a cent dries up faster than spit on a griddle when you realize they are expanding the tax to all your mobile devices:
“Additionally, it is believed that an ordinance that includes a slight reduction in the tax rate would have a revenue neutral impact because the tax base would be somewhat expanded.”
Read that again. “would have revenue neutral impact”? “the tax base would be somewhat expanded“? Excuse me, Folks, the revenue impact will be VERY POSITIVE. They will make more money with this “modernized” version than they ever made off the old ordinance. And “somewhat” ? That’s a joke – the base is going to be VERY MUCH EXPANDED. They will be getting taxes on cell phones that have never been taxed, from at least two major carriers that I am aware of — you can bet your booty this tax is being expanded.
City Manager Dave Burkland, in his report, says he is setting out to “protect the existing revenue for the General Fund” – that the city is in danger of losing about $900,000 a year if voters don’t pass this “modern” ordinance. But it’s obvious, they’re set to gain a heck of a lot more than that if it does get passed.
Chico Taxpayers Association 
If they want the tax “modernization” to be revenue neutral they should be required to review the revenue stream quarterly and adjust the rate accordingly if it collects more than anticipated.
Great idea. Burkland himself says in his report, “Additionally, in an effort to keep the update ‘revenue neutral’ for the citizens of Chico, I also recommend that the amendment include a slight rate reduction…”
but, read on, he’s only recommending a reduction of 25 lousy cents a month, while he’s expanding the tax to include new stuff. Ooooo, tricky, tricky Dave Baby!
I’m going to start calling him, “Diamond Dave.” We should get him a gold tooth and a fur pimp hat!
In fact, I would like to bring forth a resolution to lower the UT to, at most, 2.5, all the way across, phone tax included.
Well, that’s an ice cube in Hell!