EDITORIAL: Stop cutting the public out of taxing decisions

The only thing more permanent than a government program is a “temporary” tax.

This month, Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro presented Senate Bill 451. It would extend “an existing property tax that funds more than 800 officers” with the Metropolitan Police Department, she said. It would do so “without the need to raise any new taxes or revenue.”

In 1996, voters approved the tax in question, a levy of up to 20 cents on each $100 of assessed value. It was “to be used solely for the purpose of funding the hiring of additional police officers,” the ballot question stated. That tax came with an expiration date of June 30, 2027. Ms. Cannizzaro’s proposal would extend it for another 30 years.

Losing that money would take a significant bite out of Metro’s budget. If that money disappeared, Sheriff Kevin McMahill testified that he would lose funding for “roughly one-quarter of my agency and about half of my currently deployed patrol force. You can imagine the absolute decimation that would have for us.”

A few years ago, many Democrats talked about the need to defund the police. The Las Vegas Police Protective Association, which represents Metro officers, even endorsed Ms. Cannizzaro’s opponent in 2020. In a special session that year, Nevada Democrats — fully embracing the progressive anti-cop agenda — passed a bill going after police officers. Now, Ms. Cannizzaro wants to make sure Metro has continued access to the tax dollars paying officer salaries. It would be understandable if this sequence of events lowered voter trust in her judgment.

But whether or not extending the levy is a good idea, there’s no escaping that this new proposal is a tax increase. That’s why it requires a two-thirds majority in each house to pass the Legislature. But Mr. McMahill argued that this situation is unique.

“If this tax is extended, nobody’s taxes go up,” he said. He continued, “But if it’s not, it’s also important to note that your taxes won’t go down. The money’s still collected. It’s just going to be put into a different pot. I think the people of Las Vegas look forward to having their police department adequately funded.”

He’s almost certainly correct. And there’s an easy way to test that assumption. Put this proposal up for a vote and let the “people of Las Vegas” weigh in. That’s what the city of North Las Vegas did last year, making a similar argument when asking its voters to approve two property tax extensions. Both passed by more than 75 percent.

Politicians should stop assuming they know the minds of voters. Make the case to Las Vegas residents and then seek their input. There’s a good chance they’ll make the right decision at the ballot box.