- Story Ideas
- Send Corrections
In the June 12 outdoors column ‘Conservationist cries foul over Corbett funding cuts’ (page A13) author Tom Tatum paraphrases Dick Sprenkle as saying ‘money for this fund does not come from taxpayer’s pockets’, yet goes on to quote Sprenkle saying “Act 50 dedicates 15% of the state’s share of the real estate transfer tax to this fund”. Is this not a tax? It sounds that way to me. So if I sell my property and have to pay the (as last I knew) 1% real estate transfer tax to the state, from which the fund receives 15%, am I not a taxpayer? Property owners seem to be footing the bill again. The conservation, parks, and recreation fund people are out of line with this. It is the same old ‘give me more, give me more’, and not all property taxpayers’ benefit from these so called necessities. I look around at all the parks and recreation areas in my area (western Chester County) and all I see is vacant land that our taxes have to maintain. These so called ‘needed necessities’ are revenue takers, not revenue providers. I would like to see just how many parks and recreation areas would be around if the money came from donations only! If you want it, you pay for it rather than take from all (the tax payers) to benefit a few. I wish all politicians had the spine to get rid of more endless tax pits in the Pennsylvania budget.
Good going Mr. Corbett and team.
Barry A Martorana
Honey Brook Twp.