Well, maybe i'm wrong
In previous posts i've argued that the County Commissioners should have put both tax options (.25 percent sales tax increase, or .4 percent land transfer tax increase) on the ballot for voters to choose. I believe that Durham voters are smart enough to make the right decision. I was disappointed when the commissioners chose not to put either tax on the ballot.
The N&O reported yesterday on the results of a telephone survey conducted on behalf of the county to gauge public sentiment regarding these taxes. Commissioners seem most fearful that putting the tax on the ballot will jeopardize passage of some $200 million in bonds, mostly for new school construction, that will also be on the ballot this fall.
The results of the survey seem to back that feeling up, as counter-intuitive as that seems. Because you know that the only other way to finance these bonds is by increasing the property tax, and the anti-tax forces will be all over that as well.
But here's what still confuses me. If you're a transfer tax opponent, and your data suggest that the transfer tax will be defeated decisively in an election, why wouldn't you want to put it on the ballot? If it does go down as predicted, then you'll never have to worry about it again. As it stands, enough Commissioners have stated they cannot support a sales tax increase that a referendum for that tax will be meaningless. The transfer tax is the only remaining option. commissioners can call a special election any time next year, with the transfer tax the only thing on the ballot. With the low turnout likely in a special election, who knows what will happen?
The N&O reported yesterday on the results of a telephone survey conducted on behalf of the county to gauge public sentiment regarding these taxes. Commissioners seem most fearful that putting the tax on the ballot will jeopardize passage of some $200 million in bonds, mostly for new school construction, that will also be on the ballot this fall.
The results of the survey seem to back that feeling up, as counter-intuitive as that seems. Because you know that the only other way to finance these bonds is by increasing the property tax, and the anti-tax forces will be all over that as well.
But here's what still confuses me. If you're a transfer tax opponent, and your data suggest that the transfer tax will be defeated decisively in an election, why wouldn't you want to put it on the ballot? If it does go down as predicted, then you'll never have to worry about it again. As it stands, enough Commissioners have stated they cannot support a sales tax increase that a referendum for that tax will be meaningless. The transfer tax is the only remaining option. commissioners can call a special election any time next year, with the transfer tax the only thing on the ballot. With the low turnout likely in a special election, who knows what will happen?
Labels: 27701, Durham, local politics
Since 1949, Durhamites have slept soundly, secure in the knowledge that, in our town, erection can be depended upon. Now, thanks to the power of the internets, we can spread that security all over the world.
1 Comments:
I'm not surprised at the survey results. I've certainly met people who didn't understand the concept of bonds: they just view it as a vote for whether or not you want better parks, better schools, etc., and not a vote that asks "can we borrow XX millions of dollars that will have to be paid back by your taxes over the next 30 years?
By
Anonymous, at 7:59 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home