Home Page

Opinion

One more explanation from Commissioner Gustafson

To the editor:
Let me once again respond to recent letters which continue to try and pull the wool over the eyes of the taxpayer by minimizing the tax impact the library bonding bill will have on our already overtaxed citizens. Itís time someone looks out for the average taxpayer and the elderly on a fixed income.
Letís consider some facts:
1. I have been demonized by some because I questioned the wisdom of taking on a huge bond debt at this time of serious budget constraints at both the state and county level. I feel it was my duty to ask questions in order to make an informed decision on a very expensive project.
2. I have never said I would not support a joint effort between the county and local units of government, but I asked for some time to assess the tax implications over the life of the bond. I do believe the county should be involved in helping to finance the libraries. Iíve said that from the start, but Iíve not been involved in any negatives about the size, location, and layout of the libraries. We are just asked to provide the money up front and worry about the details later. Thatís a lousy way to represent the people. It makes me wonder whatís the real motive of the library people in trying to rush this bone through the county board. Is it because we have two new commissioners with no experience in county budgets? Or is it because they want to keep the citizens in the dark until the bond is passed?
3. The current library bond proposal being considered will cost the average taxpayer an additional $40 to $50 more, not the $6 to $10 that mayor Dubose mentioned in his letter, and thatís on top of the $400,000 the county already pays to the library system annually.
4. Just because this bond is not part of the general levy some say it is not relevant. Well, when it shows up on your tax statement as a special library levy, who do you think will pay for it? It will come out of the same pocket of the taxpayer. Letís stop trying to fool the public into thinking this is not relevant. A tax is a tax no matter how you slice it. We are already paying a special tax for the lake improvement district and a special tax for solid waste disposal, just to name a couple.
5. Some have criticized the county for the lack of space and the condition of the library buildings. Since when has the county been responsible for the buildings? They have always been owned and operated by the city. The county has always responded when asked to pay for more hours. The cost to the county taxpayer has increased nearly every year. It shows how ignorant some are of the facts.
6. Mayor Dubose said he wants me to represent my district regarding this matter. Does he really? Most of the calls to me have been against the bonding at this time because of the economic uncertainty and the budget shortfalls ahead. The State Legislature will continue to withhold county funds for at least the next couple years. Thatís relevant.
7. Consider some of the real emergency issues facing the county that need to be addressed A.S.A.P. Upgrading our communications system will cost us over $2 million. Building a new jail could cost over $20 million. We need office space in North Branch. We have major repairs needed at the court house. We are being asked to purchase 9 acres at the highway intersection of the freeway and CSAH 17 in Lent Township for the interchange project. This could cost over $400,000, and there will be major bonds for our new sewer expansion.
8. Since the library bond has become such a divisive issue maybe we should follow Commissioner Robinsonís advice and put it to the voters. Let the people in the county decide by referendum. Watch the response by some to that suggestion.
Bob Gustafson
3rd District Commissioner

Top of Page

©ECM Post Review

6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com