No on Prop 1
Dear Editor: This summer, the Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka voted to replace the senior sales tax exemption (available without qualification to all Sitkans over the age of 65) with a rebate available to those same seniors, provided they qualify as having low incomes. The value of the rebate is such that it would apply to roughly the first $6,000 in retail purchases made throughout the year. It should be noted that, though there was vigorous opposition to this change from a small number of Sitkans, there was no attempt made to propose a fairer system that would also provide relief for the many low-income Sitkans of younger ages, including families with children.
Many of our seniors are among the wealthiest members of our community, including retirees with comfortable pensions, vacationers who increasingly are purchasing entire neighborhoods in order to preserve vacant lots around their expensive seasonal homes, and owners of several of our most profitable local business. These people hardly need a break on their sales taxes, yet some of the most vociferous organizers of the petition that placed Ballot Proposition 1 on the municipal ballot are among their number.
If you want to see tax relief for low-income Sitkans, Ballot Proposition 1 is not the solution. Please join me in voting no on Ballot Proposition 1.
Stephen Courtright, Sitka
Homeless Issue
Dear Editor: In descending order: idiot, moron, imbecile. In which compartment do you reside?
Sitka City and Borough Assembly castaway surplus monies to nonprofit corporate entities. (See: weekend edition, ‘‘Daily Sitka Sentinel,’’ Sept. 21, 2018.)
Sitka City and Borough Assembly decline any consideration regarding a homeless shelter. Homeless Connect (747-7978) is an informal group of do-gooders continuously, conspicuously ignored by our mayor and city Assembly. For shame!
Jeff Kinnan, Sitka
Assembly Candidates
Dear Editor: Greetings Sitka Assembly candidates.
I listened to the Sept. 25 Assembly meeting which had several contentious agenda items regarding large expenditures to include the airport, Crescent Harbor and the very contentious plastic bag tax, to name a few. I guess as I struggle to think about my votes for my future leaders I hoped I would hear from those potential candidates for all seats on the meeting issues. Not a single candidate came forward to voice their opinions. Why is that? Don’t they want us to vote with an idea of how they would/will have to deal with these issues? They are not going away in the next few weeks but it sure would be helpful to hear from them.
As a resident since 1959 I have seen many changes and I am disappointed that our potential leaders did not appear to speak their piece on issues they will have to deal with if elected. I have read the brief information in the newspaper and so far am not able to come to any real conclusion as to how they will deal with Sitka issues. I certainly don’t have the answers for some of the problems but I do have a few ideas.
I tried yesterday to use the city website to send a message to the currently elected Assembly but only heard they had not received any new communications so I think maybe there was a problem with city website (or I hope that was the case).
Anyway, I have a strong interest in what happens in “my” town and I would really like to hear more from the candidates. If candidate contact information was more readily available I would have sent this message direct. I’m in the phone book if anyone besides me uses those anymore.
A most concerned citizen of Sitka.
Kim Elliot, Sitka
No on Prop 2
Dear Editor: I am sharing my friend’s story, as she would like to remain anonymous.
‘‘I am a 20-year resident of Sitka and I bartend part-time at one of the smoking establishments in town. I am a non-smoker, eat healthy and lead an active lifestyle.
‘‘I have been working at this bar for some time now and feel I am a valued employee.
‘‘I was working four nights a week for years and recently had to cut back to one night a week due to health effects from the secondhand smoke. After visiting my doctor when I was concerned about a persistent cough, s/he recommended that I quit working in the smoking bar.
‘‘I am a single young woman with two jobs just trying to make ends meet, living in an expensive community. Truth is, I cannot afford to quit, nor do I want to, because I enjoy my job at the bar.
‘‘Why can’t I have equal access to the benefits of this good-paying job, alongside people I enjoy working with, and not have to subject my health?
‘‘I was excited to hear when the statewide smoke-free law passed because it will finally provide the opportunity for protection of my health while at work in this establishment, but am now worried that my protection may be at risk with Proposition 2.
‘‘As a hardworking, reliable and committed bartender my employment is respected, shouldn’t my health be?
‘‘It’s time for all workplaces in Sitka to be smoke-free alongside the rest of Alaska. Do not leave the valuable health protections or our Sitka workers behind.
‘‘Vote ‘NO’ on Prop. 2. My lungs and I thank you! Sincerely, the Non-Smoking Bartender.’’
Submitted by Amanda Roberts,
on behalf of my friend
Re: Bag Tax
Dear Editor: If plastic grocery bags are hurting our oceans then the Assembly should ban them. Passing any kind of tax without letting the public vote on said tax is evil. Depriving the public of their right to tax themselves is socialism at its worst. Business owners should be allowed to provide compostable bags.
Clyde Bright, Sitka
Community Issues
Dear Editor: After reading the recent spate of letters regarding the bag tax, the senior tax change and Sitka Community Hospital, I felt the need to put in my two cents, as a recent letter writer wrote. The level of hysteria and vitriol sweeping the country seems to have infiltrated our community as well.
The bag tax is what it is, an attempt by the city government to do what many see needs to be done to protect the environment by reducing a harmful contaminant. It is not a way for the government to get money to spend frivolously. The recent writer who questioned the right of government to influence the behavior of the citizens made a valid point. Let’s discuss that.
Regarding the hospital, I find the comments and innuendo that Assembly members have some vendetta against the hospital or are somehow benefiting from the proposed sale to SEARHC troubling. It fosters an atmosphere of mistrust and ill will that is just wrong. I was on the Sitka Community Hospital board about 10 years ago. It was evident to many of us then that the hospital was not financially viable. We received two $1 million loans to meet basic operating expenses. Although things seem better financially, the hospital will always require substantial subsidies to continue to operate. I only hope that if a vote goes before the citizens it is accompanied by a realistic estimate of what the cost to the citizens might be.
I want to add that I have received all my medical procedures at the Sitka Community Hospital. I work through the hospital. I receive referrals from hospital providers. I want things to remain the same as do most of us but I just do not see that as a viable possibility unless taxes are substantially raised.
The sale tax change regarding the senior exemption is also fraught with misconceptions and emotion. A statistical breakdown by age shows that individuals 65 and older are among the most financially able demographic group in Sitka, as is true in most of the United States. Of course, statistical data describe groups not individuals. There are many individuals within this group who are struggling financially and their financial outlook will not change. I believe this is why the tax structure was altered, those who can afford to pay the tax should and those who cannot should not. It was a strategy based on available information not a plot to exploit our citizens or embarrass those who need assistance.
Those who make the most noise hold strong beliefs. I do not expect them to change their beliefs after reading this letter. Facts, statistics, opinions from experts do little to alter beliefs based on strong emotions. We all seek support to bolster what we already believe, myself included. But most people tend to be in the middle and, unfortunately, not prone to speak out. I urge those of us who are in the middle to make some noise so that those who scream from the rooftops will not appear to be spokespeople for our community. Perhaps I’m wrong, what do you think?
Charles Morgan, Sitka
No on Prop 1
Dear Editor: I am encouraging Sitkans to vote no on Proposition 1 (senior sales tax exemption) at next Tuesday’s election. A no vote would mean that qualifying low income seniors would receive a yearly sales tax rebate of $350 for a single senior and $450 for a married senior. The remainder of the seniors would pay sales tax. A yes vote would mean that all seniors, regardless of income level or personal assets, would be exempt from paying sales tax.
When the sales tax exemption for seniors was put in place some 40 years ago, seniors made up 6 percent of the total population. Today, seniors comprise 17 percent of the population. That percentage is predicted to increase to nearly 20 percent by 2021.
Originally, seniors were required to be retired before they could claim the sales tax exemption. If Proposition 1 passes, seniors would not need to be retired in order to receive the exemption. Also, when one person in a household reaches the age of 65, both the senior and spouse or partner will be exempt from paying sales tax.
Individuals do receive several benefits when they reach the age of 65. By state law, seniors do not pay property tax on the first $150,000 of the assessed value of their home. Seniors do not pay state registration fees on their vehicle. Seniors do not pay for hunting or fishing licenses. In addition, many Sitka businesses give discounts to seniors. Sea Mart, Market Center and AC Lakeside give seniors a 5 percent discount on purchases.
The state is struggling. Sitka receives $3,500,000 less from the State today than it did three years ago. With the proportion of seniors continuing to increase, the burden of funding our schools and our city will fall on a smaller proportion of the population if all seniors are exempt from paying sales tax.
Please consider voting no on Proposition 1 on Tuesday.
Susan Litman, Sitka
A Vote for Sheila
Dear Editor: Please vote for my friend, Assembly candidate Sheila Finkenbinder.
Sheila is the most active participant in community affairs that I know. You will always find her at meetings, lectures and benefits. Her close engagement with the community has been going on for decades. And it will continue as she has chosen to be part of Sitka in retirement. She is fully committed to helping Sitka move forward and succeed in these times of fiscal challenge and uncertainty.
Sheila has always worked to help Sitka grow and business, jobs, and economic development are key focuses of her efforts. Setting the stage for families to thrive in our community is what she is all about.
The new Assembly needs Sheila’s calm, pragmatic and carefully reasoned voice. Her natural openness enables her to gather ideas and information from throughout the community. Have you heard her ideas for affordable housing? I really believe she is on the right track on this issue. Changes in city zoning and permitting are the key to accomplishing some meaningful progress on this important need in our community.
So – want an effective, committed, and thoughtful voice on the new Assembly? Vote for Sheila on October 2.
Nancy Blatchley Davis, Sitka
