Your views

Tax increase not justified

To the editor,

It would be nice if some person or organization would construct an aquatic park for Fort Scott and its visitors. However, as others have pointed out, the project should meet the criteria related to construction costs with revenue projections adequate to repay a loan, cover the cost of operation and turn a profit; all from the planned user fees.

When projects fail profit criteria, it is normal for aggressive and well meaning sponsors to try to get the general public to pay for a poor idea. The best way to spread cost is a combination of user fees and a general sales tax. One can avoid user fees by not using the facility; however, the sales tax increase (of 13.7 percent in this case) can only be avoided by doing your shopping outside the city. Adding 1 percent sales tax will increase the tax on $10,000 of retail purchases from $730 to $830. This extra $100 may seem to be a trivial amount for some but could prevent some people from being able to also pay a user fee.

Maybe other groups are interested in similar projects such as a bowling alley, a roller rink, a skating/hockey rink, a race track or a movie theater. If these too will not generate sufficient fees to cover expenses, should we supplement them with additional sales tax? The city issues tax abatements to attract new business and industry or expand existing ones. These abatements are, in effect, a tax increase for all other tax payers (without allowing them a vote).

As to "false information," the published (see May 3 or 10 issue) legal notice for the June 5th election appears to be flawed by implying the bond proceeds not only will cover the estimated cost of the project construction, but, suggests it will also make "payment of operating and maintenance costs thereof." Operation and maintenance expenses will not be financed by the borrowing. Shortfalls in sales tax revenues must be met by reductions in other city expenses or additional taxation, likely property tax increases. Bankruptcy is not an option.

The notice also includes examples of the increases in collections and mill (levies required should sales tax revenues fall below estimates.

Notes indicate the examples are based on 2006 assessed evaluations of $50.2 million; however, prior data indicate 2006 evaluations were only $41.8 million, an error exceeding 20 percent. At the 90 percent level or 10 percent shortfall the collection from additional property taxation would need to be $86,354 rather than $34,186 as published. The mill levy required 0.698 is close to the published 0.68. The 80 percent level or 20 percent shortfall would amount to $172,708 instead of the published $120,540 and the mill levy increase would need to be only 1.395 instead of the 2.40 indicated. Such errors are troubling.

Published reports indicate 5,000 survey questionnaires were mailed and 16 percent or 800 were returned. The 2005 year end population of Fort Scott was reported to be 8,048. Additionally there are probably about 3,000 mailing addresses in town. One has to wonder how many surveys were really returned from Fort Scott voters?

If Mercy wants an indoor aquatic rehab facility, let them build one adjacent to their other rehab facilities. Yes, the current pool is about 70 but so am I and it is still a very decent swimming pool which could be modified to meet most of your wants. With modest investments several more decades can be enjoyed using it. It is also possible, if there is real interest, to lengthen the season to include May and September. If the consumers are primarily students, how much time can they give to swim programs while carrying on studies and all the other extra curricular activities? If the consumers are elderly or visitors, how many will go for a swim or even exercise in colder weather? Vote NO on this tax increase! If you want to bet $6.8 million of the city's resources on a project that almost guarantees losing a minimum of $560,000 over the next ten years you might think about voting yes on this issue. My conclusion is to vote NO! Then let's get on with attracting some businesses to the downtown area and finding a couple of good restaurants. That and lower sales tax rates will bring more people to town than overly programmed and staffed swimming.

Ralph Willard Fort Scott

Attention dialysis patients

To the editor,

A company, located in Leavenworth, Kan. has informed me if we can get at least 25 names of people in our area who are currently on -- or know for certain they will be placed on -- dialysis, they will get a place here for us to take our treatments.

You may contact me at home. My phone number is (620) 223-1561, or see me at 312 Heylman St. You may also contact Carla Bryant Farmer at Mercy Health Center (620) 223-7026. We would really appreciate hearing from anyone who would be willing to help us with this dilemma. It is difficult enough to face the fact you will have to rely on dialysis for the remainder of your life, but to always wonder how you are going to make it to Pittsburg three times a week for your treatment is really stressful, so please consider helping if you can.

God bless you.

Marvin Rankin Fort Scott