Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 3 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
To the editor:
I have read with great interest your editorial criticizing the Piedmont Environmental Council’s study which shows the relationship of taxes paid to tax dollars needed by residential, industrial/commercial, and open space land uses. I must say, you’re right, and we must do something about it!
PEC’s study, which tried to claim that it is residential property, with all those kids, and malfunctioning electrical systems, and chimney fires, and stereos just begging to be stolen, that are causing higher taxes to support schools, and special firefighting equipment, and extra police - why, they missed the whole point!
You’re exactly right. . .those big landowners, wasting all that land with nothing on it, they’re fortunate to be able to pay taxes, just like you said, and they ought to pay more. Why, it’s just like you said also, they’re not subsidizing me and my 77/100 acre; it doesn’t matter whether the farmer’s cows go to school with my two children or not. The school is there if the cows do decide to go, and it is for the PUBLIC GOOD, so the farmer should be proud to pay taxes.
Look at all the room that, farmer has to spread out, and I have to really squeeze to get my two children, wife, house, furniture, four cars, six bicycles, three lawnmowers, gas, paint, oil, chemicals, incinerator, pistols, rifles, shotguns, and boom box on my tiny little lot.
It makes me mad, just thinking about it. So mad I think I’ll go down to the courthouse and complain for a few hours; and they better listen, because that’s what they’re there for. And they better listen to all those cows if they decide to come in and complain.
Why, I’m paying about $400 per year in taxes on my little piece of land! That’s $520 per acre in taxes! And that farmer is only paying about $12 per acre, I’ll bet. He’s a part of this society, and like you said, “the service is in the insurance, and everybody gets that to an equal degree.” Let’s make everybody pay by the acre. . .that’s the only fair way. Let’s not get mixed up with all this garbage about who causes the need for services.
And let’s not tax buildings, either; because people live in buildings, and they’ll start thinking again about people causing the need for government services. And we know that's not true, don’t we? For example, the fire department may need that new hook and ladder truck for house fires, but it’s there to help put out the farmer’s field fire, too, if he needs it.
I think I’m on to something. It’s not people we tax, it’s land. And since everyone should be taxed equally according to the land they have, it should work in all counties, right? Let’s see:
Rappahannock contains 267 square miles, never mind that there are only 6000 people here. Stafford County, north of Fredricksburg, has 277 square miles. They have 43,900 people, but they’re irrelevant. And Roanoke County has 246 square miles, with 73,800 people (don’t worry about then)).
These three counties have about the same acreage so they should all have similar public needs, right? But something’s wrong. Rappahannock spent $2,360,858 on schools in FY '82, but Stafford spent $21,016,064, and Roanoke spent $43,004,750. . .Well, no
90.3%