To the Editor:
I agree with Juliana Morawski’s April 4 letter opposing the Valley Hi rebate, albeit for slightly different reasons.
First, how do officials plan on making the reimbursements fair? Are they going to take into account how much people’s property taxes are worth? What about how many years someone has lived in the county and paid property taxes? If they were to make these calculations, perhaps they could come up with a fair way to distribute the surplus, but I doubt the officials are capable of such a task and I heard they are planning on giving everybody the same amount of money. That makes no sense.
Second, even if they did factor in these variables, the rebate would still be unfair for renters. Landlords would reap the benefits while tenants who help pay the landlords’ property taxes would see nothing.
Third, if they want to reduce the surplus, why not just abate the tax? Perhaps the surplus wouldn’t be shrunk as quickly, but is that so bad? Are they in a rush to get the surplus to zero, and if so, why? At that point, won’t they just have to raise property taxes again? Eventually the nursing home will need upgrades. We should maintain some surplus money to prepare for that.
Jack Franks already tried unsuccessfully to privatize Valley Hi and residents rebuked those efforts. Hopefully this rebate isn’t some weird scheme to dry out the funds and then retry privatization in a few years.