Friday, July 20, 2007

Property Tax Pandering

Some local Republicans are doing some major league pandering; and it sickens me.

According to WANE TV:
<http://www.wane.com/Global/story.asp?S=6814300&nav=menu32_8_3>

Basically State Senator David Long and State Representatives Matt Bell and Jeff Espich (All Republicans) are asking the State (Mitch Daniels) to reassess all of the property in Aboite Township.

What a stupid, stupid idea.

I remember back when the Pine Valley area (Where I live) was annexed into the City in 2003. The following year, according to the Allen County Assessor, those parts of Perry Township that were annexed into Fort Wayne experienced property tax increases of an average of 66%. There was no outcry from our elected officials.

Aboite gets annexed and has a property tax increase of 57% and press conferences are being held etc. Give me a break.

I am extremely disappointed in these three Republicans. They are pandering.

They had the power to do something about everyone's property taxes for as long as they have been in office. They have neglected to do so.

Please realize that it is not the State's problem in general; it is local government's problem. The State of Indiana needs to follow the plan I have outlined on this blog. We have to split local and State functions and taxes so that these two sets of elected officials quit blaming each other for the tax increases!

Mike Sylvester
By at

3 comments:

Robert Enders said...

1. That 57% tax increase is the price Aboite pays for being in Fort Wayne. While I have lived in Fort Wayne as long as I can remember, I am still opposed to annexation on purely moral grounds. If the US forcibly annexed Ontario, there would be a tremendous outcry both here and abroad. There was no vote or petition drive regarding the matter. Instead, the good people of Aboite were annexed without their consent.

2. Now that Fort Wayne has a wider tax base, shouldn't the per capita taxes paid by the average homeowner go down? I do realize that the city must now provide services to the newly annexed areas. For example, the FWPD must now brave the mean streets of Aboite. But wouldn't the addition tax revenue from Aboite more than make up for the additional expenditures? If not, why did the city bother annexing them?

20 July, 2007 17:06
Anonymous said...

"For example, the FWPD must now brave the mean streets of Aboite."

Thanks for the laugh.

20 July, 2007 17:31
Doug said...

With respect, I think it is significantly a State issue. The State eliminated the inventory tax without an obvious means of replacement. The State cut the homestead and property tax replacement credits without significantly reducing the burdens it imposed on localities.

Local government spending has not skyrocketed and yet the tax burden has; so I think you need to look for other explanations as to why this happened. (Or at least that's how it looks in other parts of the state. Maybe Allen County spending has increased in proportion to the property tax increases.)

20 July, 2007 19:27

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Search This Blog

Offices on the Ballot - Allen County 2024

  OFFICES ON THE 2024 BALLOT ALLEN COUNTY INDIANA   FEDERAL   President of the United States United States Representative Dist...

Blog Archive

Labels


Brgd. General Anthony Wayne US Continental Army

Sitemeter




My blog is worth $11,855.34.
How much is your blog worth?

Followers

About Commenting

Keep it clean and relevant to the post. If you have a question that isn't related to a recent post, email me at enders.robert@gmail.com . You can also email me if you want to make an anonymous comment.

DISCLAIMER

Per the by-laws of the Libertarian Party of Allen County, the Chair is the official spokesperson of LPAC in all public and media matters.

Posts and contributions expressed on this forum, while being libertarian in thought and intent, no official statement of LPAC should be derived or assumed unless specifically stated as such from the Chair, or another Officer of the Party acting in his or her place, and such statements are always subject to review.