LETTER: User fee is a new tax
Maintenance on bridges and the replacement of unsafe bridges is a necessity for safe travel. We know that, but "user fee" has become the bureaucratic way of avoiding the dreaded "t" word: tax. The recent tax on all things vehicular was also called a fee. It was a tax. A toll when you use a bridge or highway would be a "user fee." Many people have a small trailer to pull behind their car or pick-up to bring garden supplies and other small items home. They do no appreciable damage to bridges or highways. Why not put the tax only on trailers over a higher weight limit?
Please explain the statement: "A few years from now we may re-evaluate it." Does this mean that in three years the commissioners will repeal this new tax or have the legislators increase the amount the commissioners can tax us? I think we already know the answer to that question but it would be interesting to hear the bureaucratic answer. What next, bicycles and baby strollers?
The provision in Act 89 was to pass the buck from state legislators to the counties. Timeline: "If approved by the commissioners.” Is there anyone who doesn't think the tax will be approved? To start the tax in October will make some people pay the tax twice in two years and others only one time in two years. That is blatantly unfair. The commissioners have already raised taxes this year and now a new tax. Have some mercy. Not everyone has the income of a county commissioner. You are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
GEORGE A. HERMAN