Wealthy benefit most from proposed property tax cut

David F. Tufaro’s recent commentary about the Renew Baltimore campaign is wildly misleading (“Baltimore’s high property taxes sustain a broken system,” Sept. 15). The Renew Baltimore proposal to drastically cut and permanently cap Baltimore’s property tax rate would have reduced general fund revenues by nearly a quarter over time compared to current projections. This would force the city to reduce or eliminate valuable public safety, sanitation, health and youth services, including laying off about 400 firefighters and eliminating street cleaning.

Tufaro criticizes Baltimore’s current policies for favoring “wealthy, well-connected owners and developers,” yet our meticulous analysis finds that nearly a third of the Renew Baltimore tax cut would flow to higher-income non-Baltimore residents such as landlords and business owners, and another 36% would flow to Baltimore’s richest 20% of residents.

In other words, a household earning over $200,000 annually is likely to save an average of $3,000, while a household earning $50,000 annually would save less than $350 each year. Proponents of Renew Baltimore have insidiously used research about racial bias and inequities in the property tax system as a rationale for their proposal, but Renew Baltimore would have worsened existing racial inequality since the top-heavy tax cuts are very likely to disproportionately benefit wealthier, white households. Further, the deep cuts to essential services like after-school programming would have hit Baltimore’s low-income Black residents the hardest. Significant property tax cuts have also led to higher fines and fees to counterbalance lost property tax revenue in places like Kansas, California and Texas, which, again, disproportionately harms low-income communities of color.

The campaign’s language emphasizes the need for equity and fairness, but passing out huge tax cuts to non-Baltimoreans and the wealthy is not the way to do it. Better strategies for making Baltimore more affordable for low-income residents include strengthening protections for low-income homeowners, creating a renter’s tax credit, investing in affordable housing and creating a local match to the state Earned Income Tax Credit, like Montgomery County’s Working Families Income Supplement.

— Kamolika Das, Washington, D.C.

The writer is local policy director for the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

The significance of Trump’s lies about Haitians

I feel sad for the citizens of Springfield, Ohio, who are beset by bomb threats and the false idea uttered by former President Donald Trump that Haitian immigrants are eating cats and dogs. Trump obviously has no consideration about how his lies affect real human beings in this country. And when asked if he opposed the bomb threats, he did not answer the question. Instead, he claimed that he had no idea about what was happening there (“Armstrong Williams: How lies about Haitian migrants consumed America,” Sept. 17).

What American citizen would not say, “Of course I’m against bomb threats,” especially one who is running to be president of the United States? There were other questions that Trump did not answer, such as whether he wanted Ukraine to win the war against Russia. He has called Jan. 6 rioters “patriots” and said he will pardon them if he is elected.

I hope people will vote and consider what kind of president Trump would make.

— Pamela Seng, Baltimore

City should consider bigger picture with Harborplace

As much as everyone wants David Bramble to succeed in his endeavors, I urge the city of Baltimore to look at the bigger picture with Harborplace (“Baltimoreans deserve final say on future of Harborplace,” Sept. 17).

The city should own its waterfront area. Baltimore made a mistake in conveying a simple title to the Rouse Company. Baltimore can undo that mistake through eminent domain. The land now is at the cheapest it will ever be precisely because it cannot be redeveloped without a charter amendment. If the city owns the waterfront, then it can spearhead a citizen-focused planning process. It can create multiple development parcels and take bids from competing developers for long-term leases.

In this manner, the city maximizes the upside potential to Baltimore, reduces the risk of failure by not gambling everything on one developer and enables city government to control the entire process in a manner most beneficial to its citizens. It also enables Baltimore to have more control over the deliverables required for the project to succeed. Reacquiring a title through eminent domain is an obvious best step that never seems to be discussed. Maybe with this judge’s ruling, it can finally be broached.

— Peggy Minette Israel, Butler