This week, Tom “Tax Killer” Brinkman seemed caught in a dilemma when he said he never supported the Heimlich Jail Tax, and then got caught on tape saying he would vote for it.  The Cincinnati Beacon engaged further dialogue with Representative Brinkman, trying to get to the bottom of the plan and his position.  Long story short:  Brinkman supported the twenty year sales tax because it had a substantive property tax rollback; he does not support the ten year plan that will actually be placed on the ballot.

Concerning the original proposal, Brinkman said, “It was a huge property tax cut and a little sales tax increase.  The NET effect was great for Hamilton County residents.”  When asked about supporting a sales tax from an anti-tax perspective, Brinkman said that sales tax is consumption driven.  “Everyone has to pay it, rich or poor,” he said.  “Buy more taxable stuff and you pay more.  It does not tax, food, energy, health care, or tuition.  Property tax penalizes those who save and invest.  We should encourage more savings and investment particularly investment in a home.”

So Brinkman wishes to clarify that he has two different stances concerning Heimlich’s two different jail tax proposals.  He supported the original proposal, since, according to Brinkman, “it was an overwhelmingly good deal for the tax payers.”  He said, “I checked many folks on fixed incomes, the seniors and first time home buyers, and it was good all around.  That is why, once again, I called it a property tax roll back at the the Memorial Hall roll out.  The cut was much more than any minor increase.”

Brinkman emphasizes that this overall savings is no longer the case with Heimlich’s latest proposal.  “I have been briefed on these numbers and it is NOT the same plan as the first one,” said Brinkman.

According to figures obtained by The Cincinnati Beacon, given the average amount of money spent by households on taxable expenditures yearly, a property owner would need to own several hundred thousands of dollars worth of property to see a gain offset from the property tax rollback as compared to the sales tax increase.  The savings increased dramatically when property was valued over one million.

Socializer!

del.icio.us

Furl It

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can log in above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here!

1. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  07:49 am | #

   We at T.O.A.S.T. would like to thank Mr. Brinkman for staying true to his beliefs. It’s good to know that the fall election for County Commissioner is not having any effect on Tom Brinkman staying true to helping the citizens of Hamilton County find the truth about Heimlich’s Tax Plan.

   Peter Deane
   President T.O.A.S.T.

2. Full of It says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  08:41 am | #

   But he still lied to you in your original story.  He said he had never supported EITHER one—any tax.  Don’t let him off so easy.

3. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  09:24 am | #

   I believe that we can argue I, we, our, them all day long.  In the end Mr. Brinkman is stateing that he was at first for the 20 year plan but is now against the new Heimlich/DeWine plan.  In the end he is saying no… but it does bring up a question—Is C.O.A.S.T. now in support of the new plan?

   I’ll give him a quick shout and see what he says.

4. Jim Meeker says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  11:38 am | #

   They are so careful not to be seen as saying anything that would do against Heimlich, aren’t they? Messrs. Brinkman and Finney are the ultimate hypocrites. The only persons who will benefit from the slanted property tax ‘roll back’ are those with properties valued at more than $500,000. Chris Finney’s $865,000 house would benefit from this reverse robin hood scheme. Brinkman’s $400,000 house wouldn’t benefit quite as much, however he would save much more from this scheme than the average Hamilton County homeowner, whose home is only worth $111,400.

   90% of Hamilton county homeowners will see a negligeble savings from this scheme, and will spend far more money due to the increase in the sales tax than they will save on the property tax ‘roll back’. Yes Mr. Brinkman, food may not be taxed, however other grocery items which are household necessities are taxed. This includes everything from toilet paper to laundry detergent. Let’s not even get into clothing (which as every parent knows children rapidly outgrow), school supplies,

   How about this little gem on today’s Enquirer’s Politics blog this morning:

   “Dusty: You botched it

   
   It turns out Hamilton County residents won’t save as much on a proposed property tax rollback as previously announced.

   Auditor Dusty Rhodes sent commissioners a letter late Wednesday noting their calculations on what the owner of a $100,000 house would save on a property tax rollback was wrong – and he criticized them for doing work he insists only his office can correctly do.

   Earlier this week, commissioners voted to place on the fall ballot a proposal to increase Hamilton County’s 6.5 percent sales tax by a quarter-cent for 10 years. That is planned to pay for a new 1,800-bed, $225 million jail and roll back property taxes by a total of $30 million for three years.

   Hamilton County administrative staff provided a memo that provided a “very rough estimate” to the owner of a $100,000 house for the three years of the rollback – a total $49.59.
   Rhodes’ letter noted the actual savings will be $44.83.

   That number also can’t be guaranteed, Rhodes noted, because Ohio law mandates that his office do a property re-evaluation in 2009 that could alter the calculation for the final year the rollback will be in effect if voters adopt it

   Rhodes’ also chided commissioners and county staff for releasing the original number, suggesting they aren’t as qualified as Auditor employees to make those calculations.

   “The first problem with other offices attempting to provide estimates or make these calculations is that they are often unaware of the complexities of state law or recent changes with which our staff works on a daily basis,” Rhodes wrote.

   “The second problem is that inaccurate or exaggerated numbers undermine the very credibility so necessary to inform taxpayers as to higher or lower levels of taxation.”

   Today is the deadline to place issues on the Nov. 7 ballot.”

   Of course Kimball and Callinan won’t put this in the print edition. It might make Heimlich look bad, and their primary function, as we all have learned, is to be Heimlich’s cheerleaders.

5. anon says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  05:19 pm | #

   Jim Meeker: Chris Finney’s $865,000 house would benefit from this reverse robin hood scheme.

   Not to mention the $1 million+ in property Finney co-owns with Heimlich in Three Centurions.

   Anybody got some time to figure out how much Heimlich & Finney will save on their Three Centurions properties and Phil’s Oakley Arlington (also search Oakley-Arlington) properties? Maybe Dusty can give us the exact calculation?

6. John Galt says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  08:20 pm | #

   Good point Meeker & anon 5:19. I seem to remember the Dean writing something about Heimlich & Finney putting the properties into their wives names on the QT. It’s all a sham of a debacle of a sham of two debacles.

7. f is for felony says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  10:19 pm | #

   Lookee here, folks. CityBeat has the scoop.

   Guess who just wrote county tax policy for the jail tax hike? None other than everyone’s favorite hustler, Chris Finney.

   Not only is Chris a greedy sleazebag, he’s incompetent, too, and couldn’t even figure out how to get Dusty Rhodes to give him the accurate figures. 

   Finney did, however, trouble himself to write a tax relief package to reduce the oppression of property taxes on his $865,000 estate and his $1 million+ of other real estate holdings.

8. Peter Deane says:
   24 Aug 2006  at  11:21 pm | #

   Brinkman has answered…

   COAST mission is to keep taxes and spending at the rate of inflation or lower. The ten year Heimlich plan was crafted to do just that. I have seen the charts and it fits. SO it might be good enough for COAST, but not good enough for Tom Brinkman. I will try and get you the chart so you can see what they look like.

   Tom Brinkman Jr.

   But then again I believe that he gives us a little hint to what COAST might be up to…

   Things just might get crafted that COAST will not oppose… read on… email 2…

   By the way, there has been NO official endorsement from COAST, and there may not be.
   COAST does not have to support levies that meet their criteria. They can choose to oppose, support or be silent upon them.

   Things might be crafted to get COAST not to oppose.

   At least he’s being honest. Got to like that about the guy.

9. Deter Pean says:
   25 Aug 2006  at  07:24 am | #

   Brinkman honest?  Give me a break.

10. anon says:
    25 Aug 2006  at  08:56 am | #

    From today’s Enquirer:

    Brinkman stressed his new stance is his private view and that COAST “probably would” continue to support the ballot issue.

    This is all so much crap from COAST. They love to bellow when they want something. But when it comes to protecting their friends like Heimlich, they go deaf, dumb, and blind. Meanwhile Brinkman sits on the fence while he runs for re-election. Some bold stance!

11. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) says:
    25 Aug 2006  at  10:20 am | #

    Of course Kimball and Callinan won’t put this in the print edition. It might make Heimlich look bad, and their primary function, as we all have learned, is to be Heimlich’s cheerleaders.

    I’m noticing this on a lot of “mainstream media” (MSM) sites lately. I suppose this is some kind of new trend. I wonder if they keep blogs simply so they have an out to disavow what’s put there as in, “OH, that wasn’t our hard news, it was just on the blog. No one takes those seriously.”