Questions proposed library funding
|
May 8, 2014 |
To the editor,
The library cart before the horse.
Where to start?
“…to convince taxpayers … the new educational
complex is worth the $8 million bill.”
Property owners are the taxpayers we are
discussing, that 47% of the county population
legally ordered to fund law enforcement, public
education, road and bridge, fire departments,
ambulance services, water, solid waste, local
government, subsidize hefty chunks of the
Restorium and Boundary General Hospital, and pay
for the library. This is another
disproportionate burden on property owners and
the elderly, especially those on fixed incomes,
who currently own 2006 of the county home units.
In an area whose economy is at best stagnant,
with low incomes and unemployment running 8.8%,
do you really want to take $8 million from the
private economy and shift it to the public
sector?
The library director desires “…to connect our
youth with tomorrow’s economy and promote the
growth of an adequately skilled workforce.”
Isn’t that public education’s role? Redundancy
of effort and expense seem ill-advised in this
new business era of economic uncertainty and
fragility where increased taxes threaten
everyone. Oh, and the stated $8 million cost
actually comes out to $14,377,716 over 30 years
at 4.374% interest from a Rural Development
Loan.
Typically these types of projects occur after
tax revenues have increased substantially and
sustainably. The cart is correctly placed after
the horse. This library project places massive
spending before substantial and sustainable
economic growth. That’s placing the cart before
the horse. Now try driving it.
Regards,
Sid Brumbach |
Questions or comments about this
letter?
Click here to e-mail! |
|
|
|