 |
| Jerry Prevo in the Anchorage Assembly chambers. That heavyset man on the right is his bodyguard. I kid you not. |
An Anchorage lawmaker is asking the Alaska Legislature to undo a 2006 change in state law that stopped city governments from taxing church-owned homes occupied by religious school teachers. According to the municipal assessor's office, only one Anchorage church currently benefits from the 2006 amendment to the state tax code, and it's the same church that sought the amendment: the Anchorage Baptist Temple.
Rep. Berta Gardner, a Democrat who represents Midtown, submitted the undo legislation on Monday as House Bill 305. The measure is co-sponsored by another Anchorage Democrat, Rep. Lindsey Holmes.
"People support public services, we pay our taxes, and it just makes you really cranky to know you're also paying taxes for teachers at private religious schools," Gardner said in a phone interview from Juneau.
The Daily News reported in January that the Anchorage Baptist Temple owns 14 houses exempt from taxes because they are occupied by ministers or teachers at the megachurch, including its chief pastor, the Rev. Jerry Prevo.
Because none of the properties had been recently assessed, it was impossible to know precisely how much the exemptions were costing the city. Old assessment records indicate the total is more than $50,000 a year.
The newspaper story also reported that evidence which emerged during the 2011 divorce trial of Prevo's son Allen, also a minister at the Baptist Temple, revealed that Allen had a secret agreement to purchase his home. The city is now investigating whether that deal, and similar agreements with three other pastors, violate state law that requires the church to own a property before it can be exempted. A city spokeswoman said this week that the investigation was nearing completion.
I applaud the introduction of this bill by Berta Gardner, and hope that she is prepared for the vitriol and hatred that is about to come her way.
You see Prevo is not a Christian in the tradition of Jesus Christ, he is a megalomaniac who does not believe that rules or laws pertain to him, and who uses his influence and fortune to punish those who dare to stand up to him.
In fact the reason that Prevo was able to get this sweetheart deal was that then state senator Lyda Green attached it to a bill in 2006, as she was directed to by then Senate President Ben Stevens, son of the late Senator Ted Stevens.
So like I said, Prevo has friends in high places. Low places too for that matter.
Personally I believe that churches should pay taxes just like any property owners. After all they expect the police to protect them from crime, and the fire department to protect them from fire, so why can't they pay their fair share?
Especially somebody like Prevo whose congregation have made him a very wealthy man indeed.
The fact that Prevo's church is extremely political immediately should destroy their tax free status.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you Gryphen. I grew up in a small town of three thousand people and there were twenty-one churches in and around the city limits. The town always struggled as their were only a few businesses.
So the tax base was almost non-existent. But all those churches, large and small paid nothing.
The fact that a Prevo has gotten rich being a pastor rings all kinds of warning bells. Organized religion, money and a probable corrupt pastor is pretty par for the course these days.
And a pastor with a bodyguard says thug to me.
Oh yeah - they should pay taxes just like the rest of us. I don't care what church it is or what religion - why do they get the tax breaks for anything??
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Gryphen, if they use fire, police or emergency services they should pay.
A bodyguard for this guy?? That should tell us something right off the bat. What an ass. He's just another grifter....
I don't mind that places of worship get a tax exemption. The idea being is that they are SUPPOSED to be non-profit and let's face it, MOST provide a wide range of social services to worshipers and the community at large. Many run soup kitchens, shelters for the homeless, are good hubs for collecting food for the community pantry, free holiday meals, I could go on and on, the list is almost endless.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that there are some bad apples in the pack shouldn't produce some knee jerk reaction to tax church buildings - this would countless smaller places of worship and only the big mega Mosques/Synagogues/Churches would remain. A lot of services that the wider community benefits from would disappear.
That having been said, this is an example of the worst abuse and is being rightfully stopped. A bunch of houses for "religious teachers"? Get outta town. 14? Think of all that money going to waste that could be put to the use for which Jesus intended.
MicMac
This reminds me of the stories my husband told me of the evangelical tent preachers who came to rural areas. Driving into town in their Cadillac, huge gold pinky rings, expensive suits - there to "save" the sinners.
ReplyDeleteTheir shills would arrive later than the star pastor and the tents. They would blend into the crowds at the last moment because, after all, in rural areas, strangers were easily spotted. If asked, they would say they had traveled miles due to the reputation of the pastor for healing and soul-saving.
Then, during the services, when the congregants were white-hot with revival fervor, these shills would come forth, seeking "cures" or "saving grace." The pastor would work his "magic," and the unsuspecting crowds would empty their pockets into the donation baskets, in awe of the the "miracles," they'd just seen and been a part of - Jerry Prevo may have a home base, but he still a tent pastor, preying on the gullibility and trust of people who want and need something more than themselves.
He is amongst the lowest of the vile because he uses faith to line his own pockets.
Prevo is not a follower of Christ. He worships money and power. I hope people see him for what he is.
After all, even the unsophisticated sincere believers of my husband's youth eventually caught on and the tent revivals waned in popularity. You can only fool people for so long.
When will Prevo's followers see him for what he truly is?
If Prevo and his followers were true Christians, they would not get angry. They would not threaten. They would pay Caesar his due (taxes) and humbly move on to do Christ's work - to help the poor, the outcast, and the sick.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who threatens this brave lawmaker is not a Christian or even remotely religious.
Prevo should be ashamed of himself, cutting deals to enrich himself, his family and friends. A church is just a building. No one needs a grandiose temple to worship. Would Christ even want that? I suspect not.
Shame on Prevo and any of his misguided flock.
Prevo reminds me of the jackass who used to inhabit the Crystal Cathedral. Both charletons.
ReplyDeleteI think it is time to end tax-exempt status for churches, or at least restrict it significantly. The burden should be on the churches to prove that they do not engage in politics or lobbying, and that they do not have vast holdings. But that involves regulations and oversight. Easier to just take away the tax-exempt status once and for all.
ReplyDeleteI'm amazed each time another story of graft and corruption erupts out of a state with such a small population. Is it because the citizens are spread over such a vast area and out of touch with what's going on in Juneau and Anchorage?
ReplyDeleteLucky for AK that there are so many bright and alert bloggers keeping the locals informed.
"Personally I believe that churches should pay taxes just like any property owners. After all they expect the police to protect them from crime, and the fire department to protect them from fir, so why can't they pay their fair share?"
ReplyDeleteThank you. The fact that they don't pay their fair share, forces the rest of us to subsidize their asses.
How is that constitutional?
Back in 1996, Lyda cut the occasional increase in welfare payments out. It was $50, I think, money that was spent locally by recipients.
ReplyDeleteTax the church.
ReplyDeleteTax the businesses OWNED by the church.
Tax everybody that WORKS for the church.
Boogedy-boogedy nonsense should NOT be tax-exempt.
(Now watch: watch how vicious the whackoes get - those who follow the "Prince of Peace.")
Ego, greed and entitlement smeared with a thick frosting of religious self-righteousness. Yuck.
ReplyDeleteGood news! Yea Berta!
ReplyDeleteObviously Prevo doesn't trust too much in the Lord if he has to bring a body guard on his in-state travels. He of little faith.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that Church property should be taxed as everyone else's is since they do benefit from the municiple's public services.
The clear wording of the 1st Amendment is that Congress "should pass no law" concerning religion. Isn't a tax exemption a law that has been passed? Of course it is. It shouldn't be allowed to stand. And since the 14th Amendment, this applies to local laws as well, not just Congress.
ReplyDeleteI am no expert but I understand that any non-profit correctly organized per the tax code is exempt, not just churches.
ReplyDeleteI worked for a non-profit that had such tax exemptions but which also actively lobbied. Sometimes political campaigns were run out of that office. They got into trouble big time over those political activities. The IRS threatened to take away their tax breaks for doing that. Henceforth their educational agenda had to be separated from the political to keep that exemption. My employer had to reorganize under the eyes of the IRS, which they did. They still openly lobbied, so I presume that is allowed. Their political activity supposedly went to a Pac that was to have separate management. I don't know whether it did or if they kept their fingers in that pie. I suspect the latter. I was not involved in any of that.
I assume non-profit exemptions had a purpose, likely that the relevant organization benefits the larger community. I don't know if you could separate churches out of that system without taking those exemptions away from all non-profits as well.
That said, these mega churches seem to be running businesses and all kinds of other stuff which do not relate to actual religious activity. I think folks like Prevo are big time dishonest users. They should be subject to the same rules as my former employers were, at the very least. I suppose Prevo would argue that all his actitivies are religious?
and who's antics and high profile require more attention from city services
ReplyDeleteGrypen,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to see that you are shining a light on issues other than Sarah and Obama. While I agree that Sarah needs to be exposed for what she is, much of her legacy still in place and needs to be shown the light of day.
Many of her sycophants are still in high level positions (the current govenor being the most noticeable) performing as poorly as they did when she was in office.
The incompetence in the State government is staggering as a result of this woman's handywork. I worked through four administrations and none were as bad as the Palin/Parnell administrations.
Incompetence seems to be a virtue. If you demonstrate that you have no business being in a management position, you are likely to be appointed as a commissioner or director. The State Constitution and statues are ignored and no one is held accountable.
What's possibly even more scary is that the current Governor is a little smarter than the previous and seems to be manipulating the State to the advantage of himself and his "friends".
Needless to say, there is a lot going on in the State that I think should be gracing the pages of the Immoral Minority that isn't. I understand that you are a huge Obama fan and all, but there is a lot going on closer to home that you could use your attention.
womanwithsardinecan said...
ReplyDeleteI think it is time to end tax-exempt status for churches, or at least restrict it significantly. The burden should be on the churches to prove that they do not engage in politics or lobbying, and that they do not have vast holdings. But that involves regulations and oversight. Easier to just take away the tax-exempt status once and for all.
4:59 AM
************
I agree. Let them show they are helping the homeless with soup kitchens or food and let them not be taxed on donations for that. They must keep strict records. The rest the church itself and what not should be taxed. They use police & fire services and road to their churches why should they not pay. There are a lot of cult churches that spring up b/c they want tax free status.
No more free rides. At the least establish a tax code for 501 c.The more they help the community the more of a tax break, but end the not paying taxes. Stop that now! And if they even MENTION politics... They pay full taxes.
The vote on House 305 is next
ReplyDeleteweek.. Please email your own
reps, and :
Representative_Berta_Gardner@legis.state.ak.us, Representative_Lindsey_Holmes@legis.state.ak.us,
to voice your opinion. thanks.
Just about the most disgusting thing to me about Prevo and his ABT is the way he takes advantage of the community coffers and then does such anti-community things as lead his followers in a public rage against a municipal law that would grant equal rights to everyone in Anchorage, in this case to the gay community.
ReplyDeleteI agree, All churches should pay taxes, afterall, they are the one percent but with more benefits.
ReplyDeleteYeah, they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, blah blah blah (usually around holidays and when cameras are present), but isn't that what God wants them to do, not Government and not the taxpayers? They charge good money for religious education. They collect money from the pews and businesses in the community, who then write them off on their taxes, you know, to stay in a certain bracket or to shift their burden.
We were at a restaurant, a table next to us, party of twelve, were paying their food and drink tab, a clergyman paid with his card and gave his tax exempt number. One of the party asked if it was business or pleasure, and the clergyman said "It was business, we said Grace, didn't we?"
And while we're on the subject, we need to have across the board laws regarding Tax Assessment. The way they are now, it's left up to each state, the assessments may be low, but the tax rate per thousand is high. Some newer communities in established areas have houses worth millions, "equalized" to reflect the aged assessments of surrounding homes, so two houses, one worth millions on todays market, and one worth a couple hundred thousand have the SAME assessment. Which costs more to maintain over time? Which hold their value longer?
Some states, like Alaska, leave it up to the homeowner to voluntarily inform the assessor of a building or three, without having a building permit , inspection, and certificate of occupancy.
I could go on and on, it's what I once did for a living, as well as community planning, working with the appraisal and reassessment records, site research, highest and best use for a property, bulding codes and zoning. Again, these are dealt with differently from state to state and town to town within the same state. It's basically backwards math, the municipality figures out what it needs to run, and they fenagle the numbers to raise that amount and then some.
In what alternate universe are these things "legal" "constitutional""fair" or "equitable"?