Letters to the editor for May 28

Voters chose property taxes over an income tax

My comments are in response to Bernice Van Mechelen's recent letter to the editor that complained that property taxes are an inequitable and disproportionate application of the burden of citizenship.

While she also complains that people who pay little or no property taxes still benefit from the services funded by these taxes, she offers no alternatives. And a citizen who does not own property is not getting a free ride at the expense of property owners. Owners of rental properties also pay property taxes and renters pay for it in their rent.

One might believe that people who live in more valuable housing not only have the resources to pay the higher mortgage, but also the higher property taxes. Surely anyone who makes the choice to buy a nice (read: valuable) home knows that the package includes higher property taxes and insurance costs. If all housing owners were to be charged equally, then those who live in less valuable homes would feel they were paying an inequitable share.

So what is the solution for fair and equitable taxes? The citizens of this state have decided that property taxes are a better option than income taxes. As long as this tax structure exists, people who choose to live in nice homes will continue to pay higher property taxes. The wealthy who choose to own and live in a dump next door will pay less.

Would an income tax be more equitable?

Dave Bartruff, Olympia

Government plays role in affordable housing

It's that time of year for new beginnings, i.e. graduations and weddings. Our children are starting their new lives with careers and families.

A recent article in The Olympian, "Study: First home hard to afford," outlined the dark cloud over the primary way people begin to build their personal wealth here in Thurston County — their first home.

With first-time homebuyers earning only two-thirds of what it costs to buy a decent home, according to a WSU Center for Real Estate Research survey just released, homeownership is an impossibility. It is tough for newlyweds just starting out, new teachers, nurses, police officers and those earning less than $40,000 per year to begin building wealth.

It seems a shame.

Thurston County wants and needs people to keep our county a viable place to live, work, raise families and retire. It seems critical we that address the shortage of home choices, and the sooner the better.

There are solutions.

Government determines how, where and the degree to which land may be used — if it may be used at all. It is incumbent upon government to improve housing policies that will allow for a variety of home sizes and choices.

There are ways to maximize the land we have in order to build more homes for our county's future, our kids and families, while still protecting our environment and wonderful quality of life.

Gregory Moe, Southwest Washington Regional VP, Washington REALTORS

Don't even think about a rezone

I can't believe I am getting all revved about yet another attempt to allow high-rise development on the isthmus. Is this a joke? Didn't we just do this?

When will this madness cease? How many thousands of tax dollars have to be spent on studies and city employees' time to review and meet about said studies?

I propose a ban on even thinking about asking for a rezone. I propose a fine of a bajillion dollars for even filling out a form, sullying a sheet of paper on high-rise waterfront rezone. I am thinking jail time for proposing high-rise waterfront development on the isthmus.

PLEASE City Council, put an end to this once and for all. Condemn the property if need be, get a plan for the corridor, and put it in play ASAP so I don't ever again stroke out over REZONING FOR HIGH RISE ON THE ISTHMUS.

Cynthia Weitekamp, Olympia