Rebuttal to “Tax Revolt proposal a recipe for disaster”-
Published in the Mohave Valley Daily News on 9/11/07 and submitted by David Brusby
September 11, 2007

    Editor:

Today is 9/11 which should remind us that in spite of our differences in opinion regarding tax limitations what is important is our country, community, friends, neighbors and family. As the chief architect of the Tax Revolt initiatives I spent the last year and a half for no compensation to, in the most responsible manner, make it possible to constrain the insatiable appetite of the 960 statewide taxing entities that want to levy even more property tax revenue. Our ballot committee worked closely with several elected officials, assessors, treasurers, business owners and numerous homeowners. The result are measures that will benefit all Arizona property owners now and in the future.

It saddens me to see yet another government employee threatening the taxpayers with predictions of impeding disaster simply because they are opposed to any limitation to property taxation. In reality the so called “steamroller” will reduce taxes by a fraction of the revenue increases we property owners have had to endure in the last few years.

Mr. Brusby fails to mention the many tens of thousands of dollars he personally saved in property taxes assuming he owned the median priced home when Prop 13 was passed by nearly a 70% vote in 1978. I would bet that this savings coupled with generous retirement benefits paid under proposition 13 made it possible for him to relocate to our wonderful city. On a whim I looked up and spoke with Mr. Brusby. Today he is employed as the Facilities Director at the Mohave Community College. Could his disdain for property tax reform be colored by my letter to the editor a month or two ago where I pointed out that the MCC is spending $62,400 in taxpayer money gambling that the voters will with only a 50% vote approve a $110 million dollar bond measure which we property owners will have to pay this before the Tax Revolt’s 2/3 vote kicks in? MCC understands that the initiative would penalize them with a lesser levy limit if the bond were approved by less than a 2/3 vote. I would hope they withdraw the bond proposal spending the $62,400 on their educational programs, or instead specify a voluntary 2/3 voter approval threshold.

In no uncertain terms this is a battle between the taxpayer’s and the overtaxers. The latter will do and say anything to assure their unlimited ability to tax of our property. The taxpayers just so happen to be the voters that will in November 2008 decide whether to support the Tax Revolt measures. We hope the voters will appreciate the wisdom and due diligence that went into crafting the measures and if Mr. Brusby is not happy with a reduction in his tax bill then we would encourage him to donate the amount saved to the taxing entity of his choice. But it is not fair to overtax the rerest of us that don’t have such a generous prop 13 pension, and that are struggling to pay the property tax bill.

Should government need additional revenue all they need to do is convince the voters of the need and the voters with a 2/3 vote can choose to authorize additional property tax revenue.
Marc Goldstone, Chair.
Arizona Tax Revolt