Slutzky backpedals on taxes
The chair of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has reversed his stance on raising taxes, the Progress reports.
The chair of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has reversed his stance on raising taxes, the Progress reports.
13 comments
Guess he wants to get re-elected.
Remember he's for the RWSA dam/pipeline proposal for the water users in his district no matter what the cost.
That's sure to be one hell of a tax hike for his ratepayers.
Good points, Buffalo girl.
I think Slutzky has backed down because he knows he has burned enough of his own bridges. Rodney Thomas is well-respected and Slutzky knows he will lose many votes to Rodney.
In fact, many believe "the attitude" and inappropriate public comments have already ruined Slutzky's chances of winning.
Does anyone know if Thomas supports getting the dredging surveys and the cost of dredging the Rivanna Reservoir before proceeding with the 200 million dollar concepts of RWSA for the water supply.
I would think if Thomas is a fiscal conservative he would care about getting accurate cost information before raising the RWSA debt by another $200 million. Apparently, Slutsky doesn't give a d** since he didn't get his 90cents tax increase guess he's going to sock it to the urban water and sewer ratepayers.
Actually, as a fiscal conservative, I'm guessing Thomas will support the approved water plan. I'm guessing he'll recognize that at this point it's the cheapest alternative. Also, he probably understands that the other alternatives haven't been proven to supply enough water for future demand.
I'm baffled by how any elected official could err on the side of "just enough" or "not enough" water for a community. Is there not a more basic obligation than providing enough water for people to drink.
How would he know it's the cheapest alternative if we have no idea what it will cost ?
I think Thomas was talking about pumping water from the James. Considering you can't eat fish caught from the James I am surprised anyone would consider it a source for water.
this just goes to show how we can make words and names meaningless. "fiscal conservative" apparently means spending an unknown amount of money to create water storage capacity far greater than we currently need in order to encourage population growth most of us don't want because a small capital-rich portion of our business community that subscribes to the spectacularly failed "continuous expansion" economic theory wants to keep trying to get rich(er) quick while destroying the quality of life for the majority of the community. we have moved so far from common sense and sanity that people still talk about this nonsense as if those who disagree just don't understand all the "complicated" factors. horsefeathers. keep it simple stupid. haven't we had enough of all the clever "solutions" proposed by the greedy and the "emperors new clothes" support offered by their sycophantic and insecure admirers? economies are created by the interactions of people as they make their way in the world. they have been highjacked for personal gain by those who would have us believe that "the economy" is a force or a law like gravity that we must serve and obey "or else." if we have to pay millions to make a particular industry viable in our area that is a sure sign of government being highjacked by the minority. if we run short of water and people still want to keep moving here then water will cost more and people will use less and development fees will increase and that will slow the demand. we love to claim we are a free market economy, blah blah blah, and yet every time the "invisible hand" makes an appearance we go to extreme lengths to eliminate its influence because we are so confident in our cleverness. yes we are doomed to repeat history because we are the cleverest stupidest people in the world.
Bravo !
Someone should explain why Loophole-Larry Davis,Albemarle's county attorney who lacks common sense, crafted a 5-acre loophole to allow dogs to bark excessively in Albemarle. Who is he protecting with his loophole? The BOS should be embarrassed supporting Loophole-Larry's ordinance without questioning what someone who lives next to someone with more than 5 acres with barking dogs is to do. WHY ARE NOT ALL COUNTY RESIDENCE NOT ENTITLED TO THE SAME NUISANCE BARKING ORDINANCE PROTECTION?
It seems to me that rather than a 5 acre loophole they should have simply mandated a setback of 500 feet from the property line. This would mean that folks with 5 acres whos houses are built close to the property line would have that buffer which should be more than enough.
somebody needs to tell Obama the old saying "those who can do, those who can't teach"
The last thing we need at EPA and Homeland security is people who have never had to try and run a business while dealing with federal Regulations.
I agree 100% lion. Once again the people we vote for do not vote with interest for the people they represent. To protect people who are too lazy to check their dog's alarm do not deserve the 5-acre loophole Davis created. How could anyone with sense approve this bogus dog barking ordinance? One regret I have with the Hook is they seemed to target hunting hounds which are not the issue. This issue is not about hunting dogs but negligent dog owners.
31 year's for a home invasion,what is wrong with this city? murder's, rapist's, shooting's, drug's ext!!!!! don't get that much prison time...so he will be like 60year's old when he get's out????what the heck...