Tax extension spends money in wrong places

In 2008, the home that my wife and I live in on the west side was flooded. With the help of many family members and friends, we rehabilitated our home and still live in the so-called “flood zone.” I will be voting “no” in the March 6 local-option sales tax referendum. There are two reasons.

First, I believe that a “yes” vote is a vote for the flood mitigation plan developed by the City Council. This plan is not the best plan for Cedar Rapids. It costs more than it needs to, with about 20 percent being spent on design and administration. That is $75 million out of the total $375 million estimated cost.

Second, I do not believe that the council can be trusted to spend the money solely on flood protection as the ballot language states. In 2009, the ballot language was for 10 percent of the funds to go to property tax reduction and the other 90 percent for flood recovery focused on the acquisition and rehabilitation of flood damaged housing caused by the flooding of 2008. To date, I have seen no reduction in property taxes. In addition, the council has decided to spend $4 million of the current LOST funds on the new library and several million more on a new animal control facility. Neither of these expenditures fit the ballot language from 2009.

Vote “no” on March 6.

Robert Zeck

Cedar Rapids