Thursday, January 29, 2009 — Let’s see. Oh yeah, I get it now. I inure the rhetoric of Mr. Dunevant. License to Steal is an “opportunity.”
I guess that should satisfy me: Ignore growth in the value of land and its improvements.
The original amount of intrinsic value of 50 plus years ago is good enough when a government body (or a quasi ad hoc committee) wants it: “A golden opportunity.”
So, using the civil servant’s rationale, I and all of us unknowing folks should be paying property taxes based on the original value of our land and improvements.
Fair Market Value increases are not part of any reevaluation. If ALCOA is only to be allowed to recoup “...just under $25 million” that was deemed the value 50 plus years ago, then ALCOA and us unwitting taxpayers are owed on heck of a refund in property taxes. Mr. Dunevant can mail me my check for the rebate due to me any time.
Suffice it to say, I believe that ALCOA deserves a fair shake. But, if a fair shake is termed “... purchase the project (License to Steal – my term) and count on ALCOA’s annual revenues of between $60-$100 million to fund the “stealing”...”, then I’m not too sure I can ascribe to Mr. Dunevant’s logic.
I always was a firm believer in the Capitalist, Free Market system. All of the whining and plethora of arcane rationale and excuses for “License to Steal” should never set well with me or the citizens of Stanly.
But, I guess I don’t have any complaints then as long as I am treated the same way as this business. Reevaluate my property taxes back to the inception of my purchase and gimme my money back. I can go along with that Free Market. Or is it “Fleece Market?”
Thomas M. McCluskey