Shorter LOST extension would have more votes

I am not disappointed with the defeat of the 20-year local-option sales tax extension on Tuesday. I was not involved with the “no” group, but they are right - we can do better. Leaders claimed the ballot language was clear. It was understandable, but vague.

How did they define “property tax relief”? It certainly was not property tax reduction, and there was no promise of holding the line on the property tax rate for any length of time. So there was no relief; it was simply that 10 percent of the LOST revenue would be used however the city chose to. Street repairs are indeed needed, but I don't think it's because the city never had the funds.

The mayor is wrong about those who voted no. We do want flood protection and street improvements; we just disagreed with the idea of a 20-year tax extension with half the funds going to vague promises. There seems to be a lot of support, myself included, for a 10-year extension of the LOST, with 100 percent going to flood protection. Offer us the 10-year deal, and we'll get all three legs of that funding stool.

Kevin Lyons

Cedar Rapids