joeguy44's comment history

joeguy44 said...

I would like for the city or the TFP to explain this article quote indepth...

The city maintains its residents are being double-taxed in some areas of the agreement and unfairly paying more than their fair share in others.

The claims are unfounded and wrong based on the reporting I have read. Since the agreement that the city let expire is based on sales tax, there is no foundation for the concept of double taxation. Sales tax based revenue is a tough form of funding. Consumers can control how much they spend and contribute to that tax pool. More importantly though, the people of the city — attention voters— should ask the council, "what are you going to do with the kept revenue?" Since they are not sharing it, and they claim that you are being double taxed, why are they keeping the taxes? There has been no discussion of lowering taxes. The big point here is they are keeping the money and still taxing us while removing the services we got with those taxes. According to the city we get the same double taxes, but now with less service.

Currently we have an health department that worked well as a county-city funded group, an example of consolidation and a potential study point for future efforts. The city has chosen to break that group up by removing their portion of the funding. If the idea of a metro government has any merit, this is an error in judgement. The process of "metro" consolidation will take years to happen. In the wake of such a change potentially 100s of highly trained health professional will lose their jobs and the community will be less prepared for health emergencies. It is a known fact in business that hiring a new employee is considerable more expensive than training a current one. Crushing a service sector of our community and in the long run potentially hiring those positions back will cost millions of dollars to even start the process. If those new hires have to be re-certified, we can tack on plenty of more money. The smart move would be to work out an adjusted sales tax share for the now ending tax agreement while the feasibility study of a single metro government is examined.

I think this whole process is another example of executive level elected officials failing to work out tough problems for which they are highly compensated to do. As voters in our community we should make sure that they do what is in the best interest of our health and safety. Keeping the taxes which they say are unfair and removing our services is a failure to govern adeptly.

April 18, 2011 at 12:27 p.m.
joeguy44 said...

So slowly that hundreds of city/county employees lose their jobs? If that is the case, the city's mayor has very little respect for his voting constituency, most of whom are highly educated property owning people that value a positive community. Not the kind of work force you would want to lose nor empower to vote against you.

Here is another point I just want to keep spreading...

Obviously the city is going to generate more sales tax, that is where the taxable industry resides. How many tourist come to Chattanooga and stay in a hotel up in Soddy Daisy? How many folks out in the middle valley area go to the non-city shopping malls? Utterly ridiculous logic, or the lack there of, by the city's mayor to suggest that the city has no obligation to the very people that spend their money and earn their paycheck within the city limits. Speaking as a person who knows many fine employees in the health department, I can assure you that the city's citizens take full advantage of the services provided to them. It would be interesting to know just what the numbers are of city based citizens using the services versus the county. My guess is the city is the biggest resource user based simple on the fact that there is a larger population within the city than the unincorporated areas, and that the majority of the resource centers — like the health department and Erlanger — reside within the city’s liimits. Just those two ideas would seem to support the idea that the city has an obligation to pay its fair share. What happens when the services go away, does the city then just ignore the needs of the people, do they implement their own service? When the burden of cost gets to high does the city just annex another part of the county’s affluent areas and unincorporated the poverty areas? Does the mayor truly believe that District 7, 8, and 9 are not using the Health Department’s resources? Or somehow that it is a proportional use to some area out in the sticks? How much sales tax is generated in those areas versus that contributed by people shopping and eating in the tourist area? How much revenue in sales tax is brought in when folks like me who live 100 yards from the city limits goes downtown to an event or just down the street and spend 300 bucks a weekend at Lowes? Your city uses the system, so support it.

April 1, 2011 at 8:17 p.m.
joeguy44 said...

Obviously the city is going to generate more sales tax, that is where the bulk of the taxable industry resides. How many tourist come to Chattanooga and stay in a hotel up in Soddy Daisy? How many folks out in the middle valley area go to the non-city shopping malls? Utterly ridiculous logic, or the lack there of, by the city's mayor to suggest that the city has no obligation to the very people that spend their money and earn their paycheck within the city limits. Speaking as a person who knows many fine employees in the health department, I can assure you that the city's citizens take full advantage of the services provided to them. It would be interesting to know just what the numbers are of city based citizens using the services versus the county. My guess is the city is the biggest resource user based simple on the fact that there is a larger population within the city than the unincorporated areas, and that the majority of the resource centers — like the health department and Erlanger — reside within the city’s liimits. Just those two ideas would seem to support the idea that the city has an obligation to pay its fair share. What happens when the services go away, does the city then just ignore the needs of the people, do they implement their own service? When the burden of cost gets to high does the city just annex another part of the county’s affluent areas and unincorporated the poverty areas? Does the mayor truly believe that District 7, 8, and 9 are not using the Health Department’s resources? Or somehow that it is a proportional use to some area out in the sticks? How much sales tax is generated in those areas versus that contributed by people shopping and eating in the tourist area? How much revenue in sales tax is brought in when folks like me who live 100 yards from the city limits goes downtown to an event or just down the street and spend 300 bucks a weekend at Lowes? Your city uses the system, so support it.

April 1, 2011 at 8:11 p.m.
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.