Abilene City Council and taxation

Fact Number One

I doubt I will enumerate each fact as we go, but I wanted to start this way as we get rolling. I want to give my readers facts that they may not know already that might influence them as they think, live, and vote.

A member of the Abilene city council has told me that statistics show Abilene residents pay more per capita in taxation than other cities of our size and relative position. What that says to me is that, of all cities in TX of our size and circumstance, every other city has found ways to exist as a community at less expense. Thus, I would say we are in an "emergency situation." Every moment that we are not reducing spending and finding ways to lower taxes for our citizens is unacceptable.
Moreover, every time the city council votes in a new tax for a new service instead of stopping an existing service to fund a new service, they are commiting an act that is unacceptable; they are worsening an emergency situation.

Here is an example that you may not be aware of: Two years ago, the Abilene city council decided to fund a second position of "Zone Enforcement Officer." The logic went like this: they will charge the taxpayers a fee on their water bills to generate revenue for the salary, auto expense, insurance, and benefits of this second officer for ONE YEAR. After this, the fees generated by this position will suffice to cover such costs and they city can drop the fee.

In the FINAL DRAFT of this legislation, after using the language of "One Year" for months, the city council voted to make this fee PERMANENT--to have it remain indefinitely on our water bills to "generate revenue" for other things.

The purpose of a city council is not to "generate revenues"; its purpose is to find the LEAST EXPENSIVE way to provide a city with its essential infrastructures. How a person interpets that purpose depends on his/her political leanings. You already know much of mine from this new blog.