People who work in Charleston could soon pay more if one councilman's proposal to increase the city user fee is approved.
Councilman Ed Talkington, a Democrat, on Monday introduced a proposal to increase the $2 fee, assessed weekly on anyone who works in the city, by 50 cents in January and ultimately to $3 by 2020.
According to the Daily Mail's Matt Murphy, the fee is projected to generate $5.5 million for the 2015-16 fiscal year, which is directed to the police department and street paving. However, the city's cost of paving streets has nearly tripled since the fee went into effect in 2004, Murphy reported, meaning city officials must do something to make up the difference.
Talkington said raising the fee is the city's only choice to shore up revenue, though he's "not crazy about (it) in all honesty." Mayor Danny Jones said in his re-election campaign he would not support an increase, but indicated Monday he is willing to listen to the council proposal.
We live in a democracy where elected leaders and voters who have ideas can voice them. However, many of the people who pay the city user fee live outside of city limits and can't vote to show support or disapproval for Talkington's idea. But they can vote with their feet, and their cars, and decide whether they will work and shop in the capital city.
Yes, the user fee provides needed funds to pave city streets and add city police protection. Those things don't come cheap. But the idea of paying a higher tax to work in Charleston could be discouraging to some, including business owners who may pause and reconsider where they establish or expand their business. Council members must consider whether the user fee, combined with a difficult downtown parking situation, discourages growth and investment.
City leaders are reminded that, to many, living, working or visiting Charleston is not an obligation, but a choice.
Charleston has been losing population for years. City leaders need to continuously ask themselves why. Is city council making decisions that discourage business and deter investment? Do city leaders unintentionally make the city seem less welcoming, despite the best efforts of the Convention and Visitors' Bureau?
No one argues that cities in West Virginia need flexibility to bring in new revenue in a state that micromanages much of what municipalities can do. Any increase to the fee should be a last resort and not used as a crutch for city leaders.