My slant on candidates forum
The Centralville Neighborhood Action Group (CNAG) did a good job hosting tonight’s City Council Candidates Forum, with decent turnout, plenty of snacks, and a quality sound system. Dick Howe’s blog has some impressions from Mark, and I’m sure LiL and The Sun will also cover the event (both a reporter and photographer were present). Because I have my own forum here, I’m going to post about one moment that got to me.
That moment was when Armand Mercier responded “No” to the question about whether he would support the meals tax, adding that he felt it would not bring in significant revenue. There was no follow-up question asking Councilor Mercier what further cuts he planned to make to city government since the budget he approved a few months ago was based on revenue from that tax. (City funding for the schools was also based on that revenue, so without it, the schools also will have to cut more—about $400,000 more!) Earlier this evening, Mercier described himself as a voice of reason with a common sense approach, yet his reason for not supporting a meals tax (not enough revenue generated) and his reason for voting NOT to hold a primary (to save a measly $40K) don’t sound like common sense or even remotely reasonable to me.
A final note on the meals tax: a .75 increase on a $50 dinner bill would cost a diner an additional 38 cents—spare change when dining out—yet revenue sorely needed to fund local services like schools, police and fire. Postcript: I’m hearing there are many councilors taking Mercier’s position, which, given today’s economy, I can understand not wanting another tax, but then why did they vote for a budget based on revenue from it?