01/09/06  City of Dallas Bond Proposals 2006

Response to Sunday January 1st 2006 Metro Section, The Dallas Morning News: "Need for bond
vote clear; details aren't"

While I do not have children, the call of "what I need vs what I want" seems to be echoing in the Morning News' article describing the growing list needed infrastructure "must do" items including: 

Street overhauls - I thought that was addressed a few bond issues back.

Sewer and drainage improvements

Building repair (police and other city structures)

Renovated Cotton Bowl - Have UT and OU made a "commitment" about their long term use?

Downtown revitalization - Are we talking those numerous tax abatements for conversion of older skyscrapers into condos?

As well as what I call "the Hanging Gardens of Woodall Rodger Freeway" (and other park areas) that the city of Dallas has on it's "need must have" list.  

Let's remember the 3 suspension bridges, too.  

Some of these are need and some address real problems. 

BUT ....

The price tag for this is around $1 Billion.

BUT ... 

In reality, the city has identified around $7 Billion in "needs" that will not be addressed by this bond issue.  Remember, we recently had a $550 million bond vote.

At the last bond proposal, I took part in a neighborhood review of what proposed bond monies would pay for.   At that time, several wish list items appeared to have already been completed.  Some seemed to be overkill (complete replacement of an asset as opposed to the cheaper repair of said asset) of which the repair has not yet occurred (2003). 

A few wish list items seemed to be frosting on an already plentiful cake of to do items.   I doubt the linking of funding to a proposed improvement exists or is at any degree linkable or traceable as the rules of good
finance teach.  It appears that monies tend to be put into general funds to be tapped as needed regardless of the original designation of their use nor with oversights that would track budgetary accuracy (is the project under or over budget). 

Perhaps the number and scope of the numerous projects in any large city are beyond the ability to oversee and manage efficiently.

Who will pay for the principal (when the bonds mature) and the interest payments for these bonds?  You the residential tax payer.  

Who will cover the payments that would have been made by those business who have been granted tax abatements for their potentially lucrative investments and when?  You the residential tax payer for the foreseeable future. 

Is the spending of funds that you, as a taxpayer, are paying for on bond items traceable or  measurable in terms of waste possible?  No.

Perhaps what are needed are taxes toward business that the city cannot grant away by abatements.  If the city wants to grant abatements then let them do it only toward city taxes that they are beneficiary of.  Such abatements toward businesses should not effect their payment of county, school and hospitals district taxes.

So what will happen?  Aax rate increase as well as the annual increase of property values by the Dallas Appraisal District (well over the 10% limit per year imposed by law) on your homes (be they rented or owned) will be the key.  I am sure the ever sky-rocketing increases in property taxes will make people want to move here along with the Dallas Independent School District and the new emphasis on police protection of business assets (business verified response).

Again, I do not have children.  But as I see my child, Dallas, I see a child dressed in rags with a lot of gold chains and fancy jewelry.

David W. Tuthill