The recent results of the alternative approval process show that people aren’t happy with how their tax dollars are being spent. But there are perhaps a host of unintended consequences.
It is excellent to see that the voting public was engaged in this case, and the sign of a healthy democracy is a population that is willing to get out and vote.
However, certain troubling posts have started to emerge online, which suggests that at least some people who cast ballots in the alternative approval process were not fully informed on what they were voting for.
If the municipality is denied the chance by the electorate to get a long-term loan, they will still build the public works facility, but they will use costlier means.
This would either be funded entirely through property taxes or funding entirely through the sale of municipal assets, none of which are ideal choices.
The first option is more expensive for the taxpayer, costing $68 per $100,000 of assessed value for residents and $175 per $100,000 for commercial properties.
District financial analyst Rolland Russell said that the average tax for a million-dollar home is about $2,200. This would add about $700 a year for two years, resulting in a one-third increase over two years.
That’s a significant increase for taxpayers, and it’s probably not what they wanted, as one of the biggest complaints this past budget was the increase in property taxes.
The second option, funding the project through the sale of municipal property, is an unappetizing proposition that would take a lengthy period of time and leave the town with fewer assets.
Our toilets need to flush. Our roads need to be maintained. Our water needs to run. A public works facility is not optional.
That being said, the voters did express valid concerns. The municipality has perhaps become too comfortable with getting hefty loans, and it’s arguable that it did not inform the public enough about the facility.
Yes, they did put ads indicating their intention for the project, and they did include some preliminary blueprints online.
However, the average resident is not an architect and will not be able to fully understand what is being proposed.
Some people complained the council meeting that occurred after the results of the AAP were revealed actually contained more specifics about the project than had been previously posted online during the AAP — which is when it would’ve really counted.
And some of these details caused elected officials to question some parts of the design. For example, Mayor Karen Elliott had questions about whether having two kitchens, as specified in the design, was really necessary.
She also had questions about the use of two large rooms in the building.
When it comes down to it, we need a public works facility. But perhaps the District was too quick to assume the public would sign off on it with limited details on the matter.
