McKelvey should be willing to justify income tax increase

Youngstown Mayor George M. McKelvey, city council and the unions representing the police and firefighters have couched the need for a 0.5 percent income tax increase as a life-or-death proposition. If the city does not get the additional $7.2 million, the police and fire departments will be hardest hit, they warn.
The mayor points out that the financial crisis has already resulted in about 60 workers being laid off, including about 30 safety forces personnel.
So if this is a life-and-death proposition, wouldn't you think that McKelvey would jump at the opportunity to make the case for the tax increase and would be eager to provide whatever information is requested about the city's finances?
And given that a large number of the income-tax payers live outside the city but work for companies in the city, wouldn't you think that the mayor would want to court the one association whose membership includes many of those companies?
You would think he would, but if his war of words with the Youngstown/Warren Regional Chamber is any indication, it appears to us that McKelvey's strategy for winning support for the tax is simply this: I've said we need the money, and that should be enough.
Financial information
The information the chamber sought as part of its process for deciding on the tax was not unreasonable. It asked the city for three years of financial information and staffing levels; projections on finances and operations if the proposed tax passes or fails; and comparison with other communities.
In light of the fact that Youngstown's income tax rate of 2.75 percent would be the highest in the state if the 0.5 percent increase is approved by the voters in November, the chamber was well within its rights as the region's main business association to determine what impact addition would have on the private sector.
But McKelvey took the request for information as an insult and set his own conditions for compliance. Among the, he wanted a written commitment that the city would get the chamber's endorsement if its need proved to be as great or greater than that of other government entities.
Such tit-for-tat is not only counterproductive, but leaves the impression that city officials know that the tax has a very good chance of passing because a large percentage of the people who will be voting for the 0.5 percent increase won't be paying it. In other words, the money won't be coming out of their pockets.
It is wrong for the mayor and others in City Hall to question the motives of people who aren't willing to take anything involving government at face value.
The mayor and city council cannot expect taxpayers to simply go along with their demand for more money. They should do whatever is necessary to reassure those who will be paying the 0.5 percent increase that most of the revenue generated will only be used to boost the number of police officers and firefighters, with the rest going for capital improvement projects.
The chamber of commerce failed to get the information it requested from the city and thus on Friday afternoon announced it was opposing the 0.5 percent income tax increase.
McKelvey has only himself to blame.