My understanding is that it is NOT the city's policy of taxation that is being followed. It is state statute AND that statute has been around for 40 or so years. I know people who have been subjected to it in Boscabel as well as people who were subjected to it about 40 years ago in Madison. Why do you think all of these pee gravel streets still exist? It's because the alders have to be subjected to the ire of constituents who have to pay the "special assessment".
My guess is that the statute was created because the property value for a house would go up once the pee gravel was replaced by sidewalk, curb and gutter. Why should the tax payer pay so that somebody's property value can go up simply because that somebody bought a house on a pee gravel street? I admit, I do not know if a today's property values go up when curb, gutter and sidewalk are put in. I will admit that I enjoy living and walking on a street that has sidewalk and very few puddles. It's nice not to have to step around puddles or get splashed by passing cars. I like that fact that there is less chance my child will get hit by a car. I grew up on a pee gravel street (still is, it's Mayfield Lane). I remember two instances where I was almost hit by a car. I, personally, would pay more for a house on a non-pee-gravel street with a sidewalk. I believe that I did too. IF the taxation policy were changed, there are going to be lots of folks who were subjected to the taxation over the last 40 years who will not be happy. Bottom line: on this issue, politicians are in a Catch-22. --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Robbie Webber <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Robbie Webber <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Bikies] sidewalks on Camden Rd - PBMVC on March 24 > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, March 18, 2009, 10:49 AM > I was simply passing on information from an informed person > in the > district, who attended the Board of Public Works meeting > the last time > this came up. She told me that there were people not > wanting the > street to be easy to walk for certain groups. "I > don't want people > walking by my house." - often tinged with concerns > about a certain > group of people - is not unheard of as an argument against > sidewalks, > although it is less common in Madison. > > I agree that sidewalks should be paid for in the same way > as streets. > However, that city policy is not going to change before > this item is > decided. I posted this so that supporters of sidewalks > could be > advised that they might want to speak up in favor of same. > > Carry on. > > Robbie _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
