POLL: Higher Taxes or Lower Services.

[stephendare]

This is a generic question.

Would you rather have:

Higher taxes and a city where all of the services work well like mass transit, wifi zones, excellent education, decent care for the poor, clean streets, well maintained parks, great entertainment options and speedy emergency care.

or

Few services and low taxes?

[sheclown]

I like the poll, but it needs to be worded differently.  Since we know that the services will remain on the same efficiency level as they have always been, that it really not an option.  It is, what it is.  So, do we maintain the status quo or give the tax payers a break and let them fight their own economic crisis without the shackles of additional taxes.

[Dog Walker]

Stephen, this is a false, forced choice in this city.  What we are likely to get is high taxes and none of the above services as the higher revenues are bled off in corrupt and wasteful spending as they have been in the past.  Courthouse, equestrian center, Shipyards, senior centers, Children's Commission, computer consulting, batting cages,....No, I don't want to increase taxes to pay for more of this.

Yes, I want mass transit, wifi zones, excellect education, etc., but you seem to be making the assumption that higher taxes will get us there in the way you have structured the question.

[Dog Walker]

Sorry, Stephen.  I guess I was reading it as an advocacy question.  Hmmm. (Considering...)

Would you vote for higher taxes if they would bring mass transit, excellent education, etc.  or...
Would you vote for lower taxes even it means cutting some services you get from the City like libraries, equestrian centers, league play parks, etc.  or even... Would you vote for higher taxes if you trusted the Mayor and City Council to spend the additional money wisely with a view to the future of the City?

Doesn't most of the resistance to higher taxes come from two sources; one, distrust of the Mayor and Council based on their spending patterns in the past; two, the disproportionate burden of property taxes as a source of revenue?

[jbroadglide]

I have read all the complaints and comments over the past months in the various news media about wasteful spending by mayor and council, but as americans we have a short memory. Seems like you could go back 100 years and read about wasteful spending within any governemnt, city, county or state. I read last week a councilman in Ohio, I think it was, wants to buy several swans for their city park because they look nice. So govt spending has been and always will be an easy target anytime the discussion comes up of raising taxes. But what I have also noticed in many of the rants about our govt spending is that most people complain without really having the whole story. Or all the facts. Take the courthouse for example. Everyone and I mean everyone has been complaining about the new Taj Mahal courthouse and saying, stop spending that money and the city budget is clear.. Except for one minor problem, that they either don't know or chose to ignore. Dollars for the courthouse came from The Better Jax plan and can only be spent on capitol improvements. It would not affect the city budget one cent. I know its everyones "right" to voice their opinion. I just hate it when they voice opinions about things they really don't understand.
Just my two cents. Flame away if you like.

[thelakelander]

How about a third option.  Same rate, yet more efficient?

[sheclown]

Count me in on that.

[Keith-N-Jax]

I'm with that one also^^^

[tufsu1]

How about a third option.  Same rate, yet more efficient?

We can all find inefficiencies in government...and in private industry as well....fact is any large entity will have inefficiencies.

But the bottom line is we can not continue to fund the services that a majority of people say they want without finding additional revenue.

Just ask the people of California.

[sheclown]

  These are lean times and our standard of living needs adjustment. 

[thelakelander]

Lol.  Is everyone voting?

I'm staying out of this one.  I don't really prefer either option.

[BridgeTroll]

Me also

[CrysG]

Dollars for the courthouse came from The Better Jax plan and can only be spent on capitol improvements.

I don't think anyone is saying that the money that we are currently short is due to the courthouse, BUT why would I want to give the COJ more money? The courthouse is currently 300 million over budget and just NOW started to be build after being and empty lot for how long?

Think about what we could have done with 300 million? We could have used that money to fix up Metro Park (which is coming out of the new budget). We could have used some for rail. We could have done more to improve the value of the city with that money.

THEN people wouldn't be so up in arms over the tax increase. If they hadn't wasted money on that we would feel like they 1) Handle the money we provide to them responsibly 2) There would be things in the city that have increased value to the city and make home owners more likely okay with the increased taxes.

But they did neither so why should I give them more money?

[BridgeTroll]

I would be more inclined to targeting tax increases... for example... We vote for a 1% increase in sales tax.  1/4% for projects a,b,c and 1/4% for d,e,f, and so on.  Once the project is completed the tax is ended or a new list of targeted projects gets voted on.  This method holds the administrations feet to the fire to spend the money as was agreed upon by the voters. 

[lindab]

I think the process for approving a local sales tax is more complicated and involves a referendum.