Why the Borough’s Restaurant Analogy Fails — and Why the Fair Tax Act Makes More Sense
The Kenai Peninsula Borough has begun defending its property tax assessment system using a comparison that sounds simple at first:
Three friends go to a restaurant. One orders a hot dog, one orders steak, one orders caviar. Without pricing each separately, it would not be fair. Property assessment works the same way.
It is a clever analogy. But it is wrong.
And not just a little wrong. Structurally wrong. Logically wrong. Civically wrong.
Here is why.
Government Is Not a Restaurant
In a restaurant, you voluntarily choose what you consume. You order the caviar or the hot dog. You get more service, more cost, more preparation time, and a higher price tag. You get a premium product and you pay a premium price.
But government does not work this way.
Police protection is not caviar.
School access is not steak.
Road maintenance is not a hot dog.
Every household receives the same essential services, regardless of home value. A million-dollar house does not get faster police response or a gold-plated fire hydrant. Your tax bill does not buy a higher grade of 911.
So the restaurant analogy breaks down instantly.
Property taxes are not tied to levels of service. They are tied to an assessor’s calculation of your home’s theoretical market value. And that is the core flaw.
Value Is Not Consumption
The Borough’s defense assumes that the higher your property value, the more you “use” government. That is false.
Your home’s value may rise because of inflation, demand, scarcity, or outside buyers bidding up the market. None of that has anything to do with your consumption of government services.
Yet the Borough treats rising market value as a form of premium dining:
“Your home is worth more, so you must have ordered the caviar.”
No.
You simply stayed in your home for another year.
The Fair Tax Act:A Better Framework
The Fair Tax Act proposes something different:
A system where residents contribute consistently and predictably toward the actual cost of government operations, not toward speculative increases in their own net worth.
The core principles:
You pay for the government you use, not the wealth you appear to have.
Taxes are tied to consumption, not valuation.
Long-term homeowners are no longer punished for staying in their homes.
Government budgets become transparent and accountable.
Under the Fair Tax Act model, the cost of running the Borough is divided fairly among those who live here, not arbitrarily assigned based on fluctuating real estate markets.
Predictability Is Fairness
Imagine going to a restaurant where the price of your meal changes based on how wealthy the server thinks you look. You order a hot dog for six dollars. The server brings you the bill for seventy-five because your jacket suggests you “can afford it.”
You would walk out and never return.
Yet this is exactly how property tax works today.
The Borough is not pricing services. It is pricing you.
The Fundamental Question
Do you believe taxes should reflect:
A) the actual cost of providing essential government services, split fairly among residents
or
B) an assessor’s estimate of what your home might sell for, regardless of your income or your actual use of government?
The current system chooses B.
The Fair Tax Act chooses A.
Conclusion: Stop Distracting. Start Fixing.
The Borough’s restaurant analogy distracts from the real question of fairness. Property tax is not a bill for services. It is a wealth-based penalty tied to an asset you already own and pay for again and again.
The Fair Tax Act proposes a simpler truth:
Government should be funded by the people it serves, based on the shared cost of running the community, not on speculative assessments that punish those who stay longest, work hardest, and invest most deeply in their town.
It is time to stop pretending a flawed analogy makes a flawed system fair.
It is time to fix the system itself.