Measure B not the best way to fund

Reader Input
-A +A
Re: Yes to NFPD, No to Measure B I am convinced that the Newcastle Fire Protection District needs additional sources of revenue. I am equally convinced that Measure B is not the way to accomplish the additional funding. I say this because I cannot twist my logic in any way and come to the conclusion that a 3,500-square-foot home should pay more for fire protection and emergency services than a 3,000-square-foot home. And, if there is a way in which the logic can be twisted, then why doesn’t my 1,000-square-foot home pay less than my neighbor’s 2,500 square-foot home? Why is a vacant parcel being taxed the same as a parcel with a home on it? The parcel with a home will save money on reduced insurance, the vacant parcel won’t. If there is justification for charging vacant parcels and there is justification for charging larger homes more, why aren’t larger parcels charged more? One of the proponents mentioned that they had worked years and Measure B is a result of all those years of work. I think they stopped too soon. Let’s get additional funding for Newcastle Fire and let’s do it fairly and let’s vote No on Measure B. RHON SMITH, Newcastle