I am confused about the nature of the proposed property tax increase and the purpose for it. I oppose any increase until our county commission does its homework and provides taxpayers with convincing information on its need.

The commission states that $5 million per year is needed for 10 years to supplement road and bridge maintenance. This suggests that a plan has been developed, with public input, and project priorities identified for spending $50 million. I could find no such plan; rather, projects will be ad hoc, decided by an independent board. How valid, therefore is the $50 million figure?

Wouldn’t it be more prudent and more tax efficient to first develop a plan identifying priorities and costs before adding to taxpayer debt?

The proposed independent board will be neither elected nor responsible to the voters in the way that commissioners and staff of the county planning and public works departments are. Why can’t the commission rely on existing professional staff for project advice? This is what they are paid for.

The commission has stated that a large sum of money is being set aside to hire a consultant to advise on employing user fees to fund road and bridge maintenance programs. Don’t you think this should have been conducted before asking taxpayers to go further into debt for a program that has no apparent plan, priorities or estimate of costs?

The commission has stated that about 14 percent of the funds will be earmarked for use by municipalities. Because it is not stated what purpose these funds will be used for, it is assumed that they will be used for roads. However, what guarantees are there that these funds will be used for roads and not spent on other needs?

Also, the question on the official ballot to authorize the mill increase makes no mention of funds distribution to independent municipal entities. Isn’t this a matter of legal concern to the county commissioners?

This issue does not have my vote without better justification on the need for this 20 percent increase in my county property tax.

Jim Newman

Bayfield