All taxpayers have the right to share their positions on tax issues
I’d like to address something I said during the May levy campaign. At the time, two local businesspeople who do not live in Milford were campaigning heavily against the levy. I said I felt this was not appropriate, as they do not live here and cannot vote.
A good friend challenged me after seeing a post on Facebook, pointing out I did not have a problem with non-residents who support the levy. I argued with him, saying I did not agree with non-resident district personnel working for the levy campaign (there is a difference between providing information, which our administration does through a variety of means, and actively campaigning).
However, as I thought about it, I realized he was right: I was more than happy to tout the endorsements of local businesses, many of which are not owned by residents. In addition, I was anxious for the Clermont Chamber’s endorsement, even though, once again, most of the committee members who decided on the endorsement were non-Milford residents.
This caused me to re-think my position a number of times: is it only appropriate for voters to take a stand (thus eliminating support from places like the Chamber), or does any property owner in Milford, whether or not they live here and can vote, have a right to chime in?
Since all property owners are affected by taxes, they have every right to share their position on the school levy and any other local tax issue. Being caught in the emotion of the levy, as I looked toward reductions I knew would hurt our students and community, I was blinded to this. For that, I apologize.
June 25, 2013 at 7:00 pm |
I really appreciate this article. Like you, I felt it wasn’t appropriate for non-residents to be so vocal against the levy, but your friend (and your change in position based on his comments) are correct. I admire your flexibility and honesty.
June 25, 2013 at 7:41 pm |
Thank you for your comment, Kelly. It’s hard to see when you’re in the midst of it, isn’t it? Emotions definitely run high during any kind of election.
June 26, 2013 at 6:36 am |
Well said, Andrea. Thank you for your commentary. I think that all stakeholders should voice their concerns about taxes in general; whether they are property, sales, tobacco, etc . . . Many people consider only those who may receive a direct benefit or disadvantage. I think it’s important to consider the collateral affect that is often overlooked and off the radar screen.
I guess we just have to face the fact that levies for the schools or any other issue will always be a hot button issue. The higher the potential dollar amount per taxpayer, the more contentious it will be.
I applaud your continuing receptiveness to input and dialog. Even though we may not agree on certain issues, I feel that you always consider my opinion. That is more than I can say about my mother : )
June 26, 2013 at 7:17 am |
Larry, thanks for the early-morning laugh! But mothers are wired not to consider their children’s opinions; just ask Nat & Sarah 🙂
Thank you for the comment, and thank YOU for the dialogue; you always make me think, and I always come out of our discussions a better person.
June 26, 2013 at 9:28 am |
Andrea: I wish more individuals in public positions would put it out there like you have on this issue. The ability to admit a change of opinion and explain it so well is sadly lacking in most people “in power”. Thank you for trusting us to understand your reconsideration.
June 27, 2013 at 8:52 am |
Thanks, Hilda. I’m glad you put “in power” in ” ” 😛 I agree with you, I would like to see more elected officials reconsidering their position and, when appropriate, acknowledging a change in thought. If we all hold on to what we think right now, there will never be any change or growth…