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 4 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
matter, they all have the same acreage, more or less.
And the schools are there if the cows decide to go. But if we tax by the acre, Rappahannock’s rate just for schools would be $13.89 per acre, Stafford’s $119.20 per acre, and Roanoke’s $274.65 per acre. That doesn’t seem fair. Why would the people in Stafford or Roanoke Counties have to pay so much more? But you told me that it was not helpful or correct to ask those questions, so I’ll try not to.
Besides, the troublemakers keep trying to equate school needs with people, so let’s look at firefighting, that’s where those farmers make out. Rappahannock spent $167,709 on Public Safety in FY ’82, Stafford spent $2,359,709, and Roanoke spent $4,367,541. . .?? What’s wrong? All these counties have the same amount of land, but the numbers are all different. Well, that’s OK, “the service is in the insurance” — isn’t that what you said?
So let’s not bother ourselves with what kind of land uses cost more. How it develops doesn’t matter. Everybody should pay according to the amount of land they are “fortunate” enough to pay taxes on.
I’ve used my handy desk calculator to apply this reasoning to two situations to show its validity; I have used my own measly 77/100 acre of land, and I have compared it to what an owner of 300 acres should pay. Calculators are wonderful things. You should use one sometime.
Since we have seen that dividing school costs by the number of acres in Rappahannock gives us the figure of $13.89 per acre, my 77/100 acre should pay $10.69 for school costs, and the big landowner should pay $4,167. In Stafford (now remember, don’t worry about the number of people), my lot should pay $91.78, and the fortunate big landowner should pay $35,760 per year. And in Roanoke County, my lot would pay $211.48 and the 300-acre farm would pay $82,395 annually.
Take public safety costs. Remember, “the return on taxes cannot be quantified for a particular land use.” Public safety costs in Rappahannock amount to $.99 per acre, in Stafford, $13.38 per acre, and in Roanoke, $27.89 per acre. So my lot would pay $297. In Stafford, my lot would pay $10.30, and the 300 acres, $4,014. In Roanoke, I would pay $21.47, and the fortunate big landowner, $8,367.
It just doesn’t seem to work. I know I shouldn’t worry about whether a particular citizen actually uses services or not, but isn’t over $4,000 in taxes for schools a little too much, even for a farmer, when I would only pay $10.69? And what do I tell that Roanoke County farmer? And why are the costs of schools and fire protection so much higher in Roanoke and Stafford counties than they are here? Are there other costs that are higher, too? Say, I’ve been thinking. . .Do you think maybe uses of land that increase the number of people do increase costs for government, and therefore taxes? Do you think maybe we should try to keep a lot of this open land around? Do you think all this open land had anything to do with why people like to live here?
Do you think maybe you missed the point?
FRANK REYNOLDS
Washington
95.0%