It also subsidizes some street maintenance and local law enforcement. Beyond that, the cities and towns are where the bulk of the state's growth takes place and they incur expensive infrastructure expenditures to keep economic development on track. They deserve a share of the state's development-driven prosperity. And given the broad authority of county governments in our small state, the three counties also deserve a share of the wealth. Instead of the counties and municipalities going hat in hand to Dover, the governor and General Assembly should establish a revenue-sharing program that would automatically transfer wealth to them.
Carper stands firmly in opposition to revenue sharing.
He believes it is wrong on principle because it could force the state to share revenues even when the economy turns sour. But a revenue-sharing plan could be devised under which the amount would float up or down depending on state income. One complicated plan was considered in the 139th General Assembly but did not pass. Instead, the governor, local governments and legislature divided up a portion of the real estate transfer tax. But that's not the best solution.