A recent Palm Beach Post headline read: "Survey: Many candidates oppose hike in sales tax." This survey is in a link on the right side of my blog.
Let's take a look at what our Lake Worth candidates had to say.
PAM TRIOLO: FOR
GARY ANTIEAU: AGAINST. His argument? It has not been said what or where the money will go.
DIANE JACQUES: AGAINST. Her argument? I don’t favor a sales tax increase, because low income and middle class families shoulder the greatest sales tax burden. Decreasing property taxes by increasing sales tax favors upper income families who traditionally pay a higher rate of real estate taxes. First and foremost, taxes must be fair and sales tax increases invariably have the greatest impact on low income and middle class families.
ANDY AMOROSO: FOR. His argument? Tax increase would help fund a much needed infrastructure.
FRANK McALONAN: AGAINST. His argument? I would need to learn more about the allocation of those proceeds between the municipalities. At this time I would not support a sales tax increase.
SCOTT MAXWELL: FOR. His argument: The proposed local sales increase speaks directly to funding infrastructure projects
RYAN HARTMAN: FOR: His argument? I support a tax increase if the voters choose a tax increase. My job would be to do what the voters want.
The county has crafted wish lists with
$712 million in projects. The Cultural Council of
Palm Beach County, has a $228 million wish list says the Sun Sentinel.
Under state law, cities would be entitled to 40 percent of revenue
generated through a sales tax increase.
So, all three incumbents (Maxwell, Triolo, Amoroso)
want to raise taxes...again!
Diane Jacques argument was
excellent but all those who voted "no" want to know where the money
would be allocated. They want to know more details on this proposed
sales tax that would be in effect for 10 years raising $2.6 billion
county-wide. If it went 100% towards infrastructure, this could be a
good thing but there is no guarantee just like in the Lake Worth General
Obligation Bond that was defeated by the voters. And even if governments tell you money is dedicated, things have a way of changing when you're dealing with politicians.
The City of Lake Worth is doing that right now with the Utility Bond of 2004 that was for a 13.2kv upgrade and now the city is pushing/considering a 26.4kv upgrade. My question is how do you get taxpayers to pay for a bond that was for a 13.2kv upgrade and now the city wants to change that to a non-standard voltage? We still owe over $50 million on the
2004 Utility System Revenue bonds that were refinanced twice as well as interest of over $12 million. This presentation was supposed to be on last night's agenda.
Things just don't seem to get better and continue to go backwards.