Providing fire and emergency services within city limits is considerably less expensive than providing same in the rural areas of the county because of shorter distances, shorter response times, proximity to hydrants and the existence of other infrastructure such as paved roads.
Is it really fair to ask city residents to pay the same tax 2.5 mill increase for these services as our rural neighbors who chose to live in the county? (Both ballots provide for a 2.5 mill tax increase.)
As a practical matter, the approval of Durango Ballot 2A would amount to a city taxpayer subsidy of more expensive fire and emergency services for non-city residents.
Tim LaFrance
Durango
