And so, it begins anew, the town needs money. I seriously believe that it does indeed need a reliable source of revenues in order to preserve the town’s assets and roads and protect property values. I am intrigued by the fact that at least one new council member who ran on a “no new taxes” basis also believes.

David Spelich agrees, saying there is no more room for cuts and has proposed a two-headed fee system which is projected to raise about $18 million over four years. Times reporter Bob Burns reported on several potential problems discussed in his budget article in the Feb. 13 edition, most notably there is no recourse in the case of nonpayment.

One of the largest objections to the property tax initiative was that property taxes are forever. I maintain that they can go up or go down based on the town’s needs. The need for reliable revenue is ever-present, roads will always need repairs and buildings will always require maintenance. Those needs will not end in four years, nor after a 10-year bond if that were a possible source.

The total amount of the failed property tax was also a major issue. I urge the council avoid finding a new way to kick the problem down the road with a four-year plan and to avoid the “any port in the storm” approach which netted the Park Place monster on the Avenue. We have a seasoned and balanced new council. My challenge to them is to determine the real revenue number needed to meet the town’s requirements while establishing the most equitable and reliable means of raising it. Then sell it, and I mean really sell, to the electorate.