News and information from our partners

Letter to the Editor: No to pool

— Unfair share

To the editor:

(Edited for length. Election letter limit is 250 words.)

A latté a week, that would be nice. But my fortunes are such that I wisely limit my caffeine imbibement to that which I prepare myself. That way, the cost is more on the order of 15 to 25 cents per cup instead of $5, and my budget is maintained at a less than minimal indebtedness.

Which leads me to civil project funding. Why, if we may be considered an equitable society, am I obligated to pay as much as double the price for a project that benefits us all? Simply because I have chosen to invest my money in my home, and not into a newer car, a boat, a plethora of cable TV channels or a techno-fancy smart phone; why should I be burdened with paying more than the average amount that the citizens of our community pay? Is this fair? Perhaps if my occupational abilities were benefiting from a true occupational salary, I could offer my financial charity to the community and contribute more than my fair share. But this isn’t the case. My income does not justify paying for a civil project that, although I believe it is a wonderful project, I cannot afford.

So, as those of us citizens in our area responsible and caring enough to have voted, let me indicate that I am against voting for the funding of a new pool and park project.

Shawn Stratton

The Dalles

Editor’s note: The comparison used for the pool bond is “a latté a month,” about $4.44 per month for a $150,000 assessed value.


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment


Information from The Chronicle and our advertisers (Want to add your business to this to this feed?)