Quote:
Originally Posted by rmd2
The worst thing is the 3 will now say their promise of the rollback of the 25% increase is out of our hands now because of the Hage involvement. No! It's because the 3 never acted in a timely manner to get this done. If they think this will let them off the hook, think again! We put you in and we can take you out.
|
It has been reported that the Hage proposal has been amended to retroactively apply back to 1 January. Doesn't this make it a little impossible for the commissioners to "act in a timely manner" that pre-dates their term in office?
It has been stated many times (with the math) that the impact fees will not offset the 25% tax. Any reasonable proposal to rolling back the 25% increase should be accompanied by numbers: How much is the 25% bringing in? How much would the impact fees bring in? Where would additional cuts to make up the difference come from? Taking action without planning for the impact is irresponsible; perhaps the commissioners have done that planning but we haven't heard about it.
__________________
Why do people insist on making claims without looking them up first, do they really think no one will check? Proof by emphatic assertion rarely works.
Confirmation bias is real; I can find any number of articles that say so.
Victor, NY - Randallstown, MD - Yakima, WA - Stevensville, MD - Village of Hillsborough
|