Submitted by jim karlock on Mon, 10/17/2005 - 4:10pm.
Sam:
The purpose of the proposed couplet is . . . .and to provide new opportunities of redevelopment.
JK:
1. Why do we want to encourage more tax freeloaders in that Urban Renewal district? They will further strain city services, while contributing almost NOTHING. The rest of the city pays to make up for the increased drain on basic services with either higher taxes or less service. (By tax freeloader, I mean people that benefit from tax abatements as well as people who pay their full share of taxes when those taxes stay in their own district to benefit only them while the rest of us have to make up for the loss.)
Would we even be talking of a regional income tax if we didn't have all of these tax freeloaders?
2.Wouldn't Burnside have less traffic if we fixed US26? Do you suppose congestion will get worse when Metro puts new housing in Damascus and new jobs in Beaverton?
re: BLOG: Smoldering Argument over West Burnside Couplet
Sam:
The purpose of the proposed couplet is . . . .and to provide new opportunities of redevelopment.
JK:
1. Why do we want to encourage more tax freeloaders in that Urban Renewal district? They will further strain city services, while contributing almost NOTHING. The rest of the city pays to make up for the increased drain on basic services with either higher taxes or less service. (By tax freeloader, I mean people that benefit from tax abatements as well as people who pay their full share of taxes when those taxes stay in their own district to benefit only them while the rest of us have to make up for the loss.)
Would we even be talking of a regional income tax if we didn't have all of these tax freeloaders?
2.Wouldn't Burnside have less traffic if we fixed US26? Do you suppose congestion will get worse when Metro puts new housing in Damascus and new jobs in Beaverton?
Thanks
JK