The City of Charleston, in a tyrannical move to tax those who cannot have a say in the matter, have found willing accomplices in the State Supreme Court. While I admit I stand amongst the unwashed public with no legal experience, sometimes the wisdom of babes confounds the wise. In this matter, the commonest of commoners can see past the convoluted and political reasons of the Supreme Court’s vote and know the Charleston user “fee” is wrong.

A rose by any other name

A key to winning an argument is to change the terminology to support your position. Pro-abortion advocates, for instance, call their cause “pro-choice.” It sounds so much better that way and who in their right mind would be against someone having a choice? In this case, Charleston Mayor Danny Jones, in a blatant effort to circumvent the law, calls what is plainly a tax, a “fee.”

It is clear that the City has no authority to impose a tax, so they kept the method but changed the terms. How do they get away with it? The Court declared in City of Huntington v. Bacon that, “[t]he primary purpose of a tax is to obtain revenue for the government, while the primary purpose of a fee is to cover the expense of providing a service or of regulation and supervision of certain activities.” The Court essentially says a tax is to obtain general revenue for the government while a fee is for providing a particular service.

According to the Court, as long as the City of Charleston engages in slick financial maneuvering, they may impose the tax under the auspices of a “fee.” It is obvious that Charleston’s “fee” merely frees up tax dollars for work elsewhere. Once collected, all taxes and so-called “fees” are in the possession of the City and have ancillary benefits to the City’s overall budget. Tedious efforts to divide money that is all in the City of Charleston’s possession is Exhibit A for what is wrong with the legal system. No matter what you call it, Charleston is still taking money out of an individual’s pockets for use by their government.

If Charleston is forcing me to pay for a service they are providing, I would like to see how much I cost the city. Can I give you a typical day in my life? I merge onto the state maintained interstate at the St. Albans exit and head east on I-64 until I reach the Greenbrier exit. I turn onto the state maintained Greenbrier St. for two blocks, turn left into the state capitol complex, past a state security guard, park my vehicle on the state parking lot, walk into the state capitol and enter my state office. How am I costing the City of Charleston when I never ride on a city road or require the protection of City Police?

Not only that, once I get off work, I and many other workers patronize Charleston businesses, supporting the city’s economy. Our hometowns often suffer because we shop in Charleston.

Taxation without representation

Most of us can pay $1 each week, but an individual named Joseph said it best: “as to the tax, it is neither unjust or oppressive, …but it is want of constitutional principle in the authority that passed it, which is the ground for complaint. Here, and here only, is the defect.”

Bryan agrees. “As to taxes I was never of opinion that [they] had a right to impose them, and hardly ever had a doubt upon the subject of their taking our money from us without our consent.

Both Joseph and Bryan have been dead for over 100 years. Their tyrant was not a Charleston Mayor, but an English King. Their tax was not on workers, but on tea. Joseph Galloway condemned the king’s tax before the Continental Congress on September 28, 1774, while Bryan Fairfax wrote his comments in a letter to George Washington on August 5, 1774.

The colonist’s grievance was with the king not allowing them to have a say in their taxation. They did not think it was just for a group of individuals to arbitrarily impose taxes upon them.

The names have changed but the tyranny is the same. Charleston’s workers who live outside the city have no voice in the election of Major Danny Jones or the Charleston City Counsel.

The Supreme Court has ordered the City of Charleston to vote on the “fee.” The problem is not all those who have to pay the “fee” get to vote. If imposition of a tax without the consent of the governed is important to the Supreme Court, they should allow the thousands of workers outside the city limits to vote as well. If that is impossible then the tax should not be imposed.

Greed run amuck

It is amazing how greedy Charleston’s leadership is. Instead of thanking the thousands of state employees and other workers who drive into the city limits every workday, support their businesses and give life to the city, they seek to paint the workers as a burden so that they can justify a tax.

I would be curious to see what would happen if tens of thousands of migratory workers left Charleston. The city would certainly dry up in no time. Instead of appreciating the obvious economic benefits the workers bring, Charleston wants to kill the golden goose.

State workers are in a particular conundrum. The Circuit Court ruled that all state agencies must stay within Charleston city limits (State of West Virginia ex rel. City of Charleston v. The Board of Public Works and the State Lottery Commission). State workers are essentially held captive by the law.

A solution for everyone

The Boston Gazette had the solution in 1774 to the tea tax: “would it not materially affect the bringing this detestable herb into disuse, if every town would enjoin their selectmen to deny licenses to all houses of entertainment who were known to afford tea to their guests?”

Perhaps the thousands of workers who live outside of Charleston yet work inside, should follow the example of our ancestors and boycott Charleston businesses to stress the economic value we give the city. If we cannot vote at the ballot box, we can surely vote with our money.

Now to the final question: if the fee is illegal, how does the City of Charleston legitimately pay for road paving and police salaries? May I suggest the City of Charleston try something all West Virginians do: stay within a budget. Then I recommend they seek ways of promoting and encouraging business activity instead of taxing those who are the backbone of the city. Finally, if the politicians of Charleston enjoy raising taxes, I advise they impose them on their citizenry and leave the workers who cannot vote them out of office alone.