Bond levies are taxes that are assessed just on property owners. They fund projects that the city or county implicitly decided are not worthy of being fully supported by taxpayer dollars. The Blaine Manor bond levy resulted in property owners paying approximately $80,000 over a two-year period for each of the 25 residents of Blaine Manor ($2 million divided by 25 equals $80,000).
Is this the highest, best and most efficient use of $2 million in supplemental tax dollars? The county apparently did not think so—otherwise, it would have allocated sufficient monies from tax revenues to fund Blaine Manor over the next two years. Why not a fraction of the $2 million to fund hospice? Or to establish a fund to pay the medical expenses of people who cannot pay for life-threatening medical treatments? Or to establish a fund to help when a family breadwinner is unexpectedly and tragically killed or disabled?
The manner in which California dealt with its $19 billion budget shortfall is instructive. When expenses exceeded revenues, the state cut way back on expenditures for essential services. Teachers and government workers were laid off, and mandatory unpaid "vacation" days were imposed on government employees. California did not try to make up for its budget shortfall by levying additional taxes on property owners.
Everybody has a pet cause. And most of them are worthy of financial support. But all causes cannot be financed by just assessing property owners on the assumption that they can afford to subsidize everything. If taxpayers are to pony up more tax dollars to support worthy projects, they should at least have a say in where their money goes—not just a "yes" or "no" on somebody else's pet project. And the costs of funding that project should be shared equitably among all the residents of the valley, including renters and people who engage in business here who currently do not pay a dime towards funding levies.
Michael Saphier
Sun Valley
