Quote:
Originally Posted by Ms Merge
The petitioned warrant article for a tax cap does not have to be 0%. You can cap it at whatever you feel your town needs and what you can get the voters to agree on. Why did I and others agree on 0% for Gilford? Well simply put Gilford spent its way into the real estate bubble raising its spending 59% for the town from 2000 to 2010 and 69% for the school budget over that same period. It has killed the real estate values. Assessments are back down to the 2005/2006 levels and falling but the spending is way above that. There has been a budget committee in place for years and an outspoken tax advocate group but the town and the school continue to spend. Gilford's tax rate is 18.55 now which blows away the other towns on the big lake. It will be 19 next year and probably 20 the year after. Gilford has 48% non resident tax payers who are simply walking away and selling cheap. This continues to drive down the assessments and drive up the tax rate. Time to stop the spending increases.
Ms. Merge
|
With this said, A cap is really not what is needed in Gilford. Sure a cap will stop any further growth. However it will not address the problem of over spending. It sounds to me as though what is really need in Gilford is for the towns people to really get involved in the government, and start asking for justification of expenditures. If you don't question the government they will continue to run amuck. At a town level you need to get involved.. A cap will fix future problems, but it sounds like right now Gilford needs to fix a current problem....
Now with that said, what is driving the increases over the last several years?
Infrastructure growth? salary increases?
I agree in most communities it is time to address issues, but don't put band aids where root canals are needed.