Proposal: By implementing reform, we will lower the cost of government, create new jobs, and stabilize our population. This will allow a gradual and responsible reduction in our City income tax from 2.25% to 1.5%--while maintaining excellent essential public services. Reduced taxes will make Kettering more competitive with neighboring jurisdictions.
1. Many Jurisdictions Have Lower Income Tax Rates Than Kettering. The other jurisdictions have found a way to manage their finances with lower income tax rates. This makes Kettering less attractive for business investment & entrepreneurship. If we are to create new jobs, we must become competitive with other jurisdictions.
a. Beavercreek: 0
b. Washington Township: 0 (townships have no income taxes)
c. Union: 1%
d. Springboro: 1.5%
e. Centerville: 1.75%
f. Englewood: 1.75%
g. Moraine: 2%
h. Huber Heights: 2%
i. Vandalia: 2%
j. Kettering: 2.25%*
k. Dayton: 2.25%
*Kettering income tax was 1.75% prior to 2007. Councilman Duke supported an increase in the rate to 2.25% and encouraged Kettering voters that such an increase was necessary.
2. Kettering’s Income Tax Rate Could Be 1.50% NOW if city expenses had been controlled over the past decade.
a. City Operating Expenses in 2010 would be over $14 million lower NOW if expenses over the past decade had been limited to the growth rate of Kettering median household income.
3. Income tax rate reductions must be done gradually and responsibly over a period of years by controlling the cost of city government and growing our tax base through attracting new jobs.
a. Controlling costs.
i. Overall growth of city expenses should not exceed growth of median household income of Kettering residents.
ii. We need to explore collaboration with other jurisdictions to determine if some services can be provided at a lower cost.
iii. We need to improve the efficiency of city operations.
iv. We need to prioritize spending of taxpayer dollars by focusing on providing excellent essential public services.