All Grand Junction residents should recognize the benefits of passing both questions 2A and 2B this November.

Question 2A asks the voters of Grand Junction to approve a small, sales-tax increase to help with the financing of much needed public safety facilities. I have lived in Mesa County for 40 years and the police station is exactly where it was when I moved here. It is high time that we all invest in new public-safety facilities.

Question 2B just makes good sense and in the long run will save everyone money. The city of Grand Junction will be in a much better position to finance future needs without asking for tax increases if they are not hamstrung by the effects of TABOR revenue limits.

Grand Junction is one of only seven communities in Colorado who collect taxes that have not voted to give their City Council the ability to use tax revenues for the needs that arise. Because TABOR formulas are based on Front Range economic growth, they neglect to recognize the impact of growth in western Colorado.

A large part of sales-tax revenue is from those coming to Grand Junction for shopping and services, thus recognizing their impact on the infrastructure.

Certainly the Grand Junction City Council has proved itself to be an excellent steward of public funds.  The residents elected these public servants to manage their city. They should be given the authority to manage the money. Question 2B does not increase taxes. It only allows the city to use the money collected from all those who come to Grand Junction to shop.

As a member of the extended community and appreciates this community it is clear to me that both measures are worthy of “Yes” votes.

DIANN RICE
Fruita

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 10:38 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.