Posts Tagged ‘Citizens for Strong Summit Schools’

Citizens for Strong Summit Schools resorts to “guilt-tripping”

Some days it’s fearmongering, other days it’s laying a guilt trip on the Summit County taxpayer. Let’s take a look at the Guest Commentary from Sue Wilcox, Chair for Citizens for Strong Summit Schools in the 10/3/10 Summit Daily News.

First, “…teacher and administrator salaries have been frozen…decisions are difficult, and no doubt mirror cuts that have been made by many families and businesses throughout the county”. Nope. I believe that a salary “freeze” is not what most Summit County citizens and businesses have experienced. I believe that they have seen their sales reduced and their wages and/or benefits cut, and in some cases eliminated.

Second, “…it is incumbent upon each of us as parents to bear our share of costs associated with educating our kids.” How dare this organization suggest that parents/taxpayers don’t already “bear our share”?! So, if I pay my taxes I don’t already “bear my share of the costs”? And if Summit County taxpayers vote no on 3B, we somehow have tried to evade our collective responsibility for educating our children. What hogwash!

My suggestion is this: Cut salaries and eliminate any/all taxpayer contributions for benefits for administrators and teachers. When the people steering this ship feel the pain experienced by the vast majority of Summit County taxpayers, then let’s talk. Until then, VOTE NO on 3B.


2D an economic must for Breckenridge?

So, why is 2D a must? First it’s not a tax on locals. I feel better now. Tax the s@*% of those gapers! That will get them to come back for more.

Second, the Breckenridge Lodging Association supports 2D. Count me in, then. They know best.

Third, 2D can help revitalize our real estate industry. Wow! That’s a stretch. Lower prices generally cause people to buy more but don’t taxes increase prices? And when the gapers get here and say “Holy crap, it’s everything is so expensive….., do you really think they are going to buy real estate?

Fourth, our way of life is dependent on tourism. Every recreational amenity….requires tourist tax dollars…”. Correct, and when the tourist arrives with say, $2,000 to spend and $200 of that goes to taxes, it means that they won’t spend that money on a dinner (for 2 because of taxes). Make no mistake, TAXES SIPHON OFF DISPOSABLE INCOME – IT GOES TO THE GOVERNMENT, NOT SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS.

Fifth, 2D will make us more competitive with Vail and Aspen. Wrong! Higher prices do not make a “business” (the town) more competitive. Lower prices do. Vail and Aspen will not “prevail” because of higher prices and higher taxes. In fact, over the long run, people will see the value that Breckenridge has to offer because of lower taxes which result in lower prices.

Six-Twenty – wish I had time to visit but the arguments for a “yes” vote can’t be any better than 1-5.
Instead of a tax increase, how about a free weekend at Grand Timber Lodge to get more visitors?