Clifford Nagle: True oversight might convince voters a tax is worthwhile

Re “Street-fix promise could sway measure’s support” (Page 3A, Aug. 21): The fact that local politicos find it necessary to spend money on polls and surveys about the public’s wishes regarding use of tax-override funds makes it obvious they are out of touch with constituents, are too lazy to go to a shopping mall and ask the people directly, or they are searching for language that would mislead voters enough so that a tax increase would pass. Is there any wonder the pollster stated the people have an incredible and warranted distrust anytime there’s a new tax proposed by government?

Let’s start by limiting the tax to repairing roads; having a five-year limit; requiring government reports on the amount of money collected and where it was spent, by project; and naming a citizens’ oversight committee to audit the process. It might also be a good idea for the civil Grand Jury Audit Committee to keep watch. After five years of successful implementation of a tax for repairs only, the voters would likely vote to broaden the scope of another tax if it did not include wording that would allow funds to be used for “general” or unnamed purposes.

This story was originally published August 31, 2015 at 6:14 PM with the headline "Clifford Nagle: True oversight might convince voters a tax is worthwhile."