Taxpayers and revenue
No guarantees
Regarding “A revenue cap is terrible public policy” (Page A13, Monday), Chris Bell is only correct in that it is bad public policy, but there are a myriad of reasons the taxpayers voted for the revenue cap.
The track record of elected officials in Houston shows little respect for the taxpayer as reflected in the council’s approval of the citysponsored pension plans; deferral of needed repairs and capital improvements to avoid difficult financial choices in balancing the budget; its inability to manage and use the federal funds for affordable housing; its continuing attempts to exempt certain parts of the budget from the limitations associated with the revenue cap; and the establishment of dozens of city-owned TIRZs, which allow the taxpayers
within the TIRZs to keep the growing tax revenue from the properties within each TIRZ in order to provide capital improvements to increase the value of the property owners’ property rather than for the overall improvement of the city’s infrastructure.
The revenue cap is the only reason the city may get some relief from the onerous pension obligations that council voted to give city employees.
The revoking of the revenue cap in no way guarantees taxpayers that any of the problems noted by Bell will be solved, but it is certain that property taxes will increase. The historical track record of City Council gives taxpayers little comfort that they will receive good value for paying their taxes. B. Dee Davis Jr., Houston