Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Taxation Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioner Culberson urges state to allow counties to consider 1% income tax to reduce property tax burden
Summary
Commissioner Jeff Culberson told state tax lawmakers and his fellow commissioners that Leavenworth County should be allowed to consider a local 1% income tax to relieve what he described as an unfair property tax burden concentrated on a small number of taxpayers.
Commissioner Jeff Culberson told the board he testified before the Kansas House/Senate taxation committee urging support for legislation (Senate Bill 108) that would allow counties to adopt a local income tax option in place of some property taxes.
Culberson said Leavenworth County’s tax base is skewed by large non‑taxable properties—specifically Fort Leavenworth and other exempt entities—and by thousands of nonresidents who work in the county but do not pay local property taxes despite using county roads and services. He described the current property tax burden as concentrated among roughly 33,000 residents and said an income tax option would spread the cost across a larger base.
“The Fort actually creates an economic obsolescence to the county budget,” Culberson said, noting the fort produces significant economic activity but does not contribute to county property tax revenues. He told colleagues that under some versions of the bill a 1% income tax could substantially reduce or eliminate county property taxes, but he acknowledged details vary among bill versions.
Board members asked clarifying questions about which income sources might be taxable, who would be taxed (nonresidents working in the county, residents, retirement income) and how much property tax would actually be replaced—questions Culberson said depend on the final bill language. He described the testimony as aimed at letting counties decide their local revenue structure.
The commission did not take a formal vote on the legislation but acknowledged the commissioner's testimony and discussed the policy implications in subsequent budget planning and capital needs conversations, including bridges and public services.
