Ballot didn’t explain effect on taxes
IN ORDER FOR voters to make well-reasoned decisions about tax increases and levies at the ballot box, the measures need to be understandable to most voters. The language of the proposed APS levies and bonds — like others that I’ve voted on in recent years — was incomprehensible. When my husband and I voted, neither of us could figure out what the impact on our property tax bill would be, and as he is a math professor, that is saying something.
The lack of a clear and understandable statement of the cost built into the text of the measures created grounds for misunderstandings to spread. For example, I read multiple comments from people on Nextdoor who had done their own math based on the language in the ballot and determined that their modest homes would see annual tax increases approaching $1,000, a perspective abetted by anti-tax zealots such as Paul Gessing of the Rio Grande Foundation. As far as I can tell, the truth is considerably less: the Journal estimated that a home valued at $220,000 would see an increase of $174. But when it comes to taxes, whether one chooses to believe in the more extreme estimate or the more modest one tends to be a matter of ideology.
Frustratingly, the financial impact of a proposed tax increase is not subjective. It is an objective fact that tax authorities have the capabilities to determine, and that, with a little effort, can be stated in a way that makes the impact understandable to the voting public. Without that piece of information built into the text of the ballot, some voters are deciding based on misunderstandings and misinformation, and we can’t even have a public debate about the issue because we’re not talking about the same question.
If we truly want issues such as funding for school maintenance to be decided at the ballot box, we need to do better than this. Either that, or APS, CNM, and UNM need to start running free “math for voters” classes. Anyone want to increase their taxes to pay for that?
JESSE MURRAY
Albuquerque