I will absolutely vote for both levies. It appears the Zoo is on the right track to correcting the misfortunes be felled last year and it would be unfortunate if the citizens of this community let one of our treasured icons follow a path to failure.I believe the zoo has made real progress towards correcting many of the issues brought about by last years controversies and to continue to hold those same issues against the zoo because of personal grudges or misinformation would be a real shame. For a group like Citizen's for a Responsible Toledo Zoo to question the Zoo's sincerity and advancements in correcting these issues by way of their February 11 press release shows to which extent they will go to complete their attempted coup d'état of Zoo operations. For Debra Reichard Klein, the sister of Dr. Tim Reichard, who was fired in February as the zoo's chief veterinarian to be named as the spokesman of Citizens for a Responsible Zoo only goes to solidify my suspicions that this groups actions are more of a personal nature than actually looking out for the welfare of the citizens of Lucas County.
The citizens of Lucas County should look beyond the fact these levies will support the Zoo and also realize that they are an "investment" in their own community. A rate of return that generates $6.50 in LOCAL economic activity for each dollar that is received in levy funds is reason enough to vote YES.
For anyone to suggest that they should seek Corporate Sponsors for support (in belief that this does not happen already) are purely basing their theory on lack of-or misinformation to the facts. The ZOO is always soliciting Corporate Sponsors in addition to any levy request as evidence by their programs such as Pumpkin Path, Music Under The Stars and Lights Before Christmas to name a few.
The idea that COSI be incorporated into the ZOO is an idea with no merit. Where exactly could COSI be located at the Zoo? In the Museum of Science? I guess the Zoo (err....COSI) could build a new museum on land the Zoo owns on the River Side of Broadway, but the cost of acquisition and the cost of construction would not be financially feasible. If thinking that the Zoo could incorporate COSI into their institution, why would they want to do that? Why diminish the reputation of a long held locally established icon like the ZOO by bringing in a quasi franchised institution like the COSI? I equate that to attaching a McDonalds Drive-thru window to the side of Tony Packos.
"I Love My ZOO" and as with anything I love I am very protective of it. That is why I have and always will continue to Support the Zoo in their efforts in keeping it a 1st rate institution; not only locally but nationally recognized as well
7 comments:
The Toledo Zoo rocks!
Wanted to add a factual comment...The Zoo does have a lot of other support in terms of it's revenue. Just thought you'd like to know that the operating levy will only be about 30% of their revenue - which means that 70% of their revenue comes from other sources.
Thanks for the factual comment Maggie. As one who had a long term relatioinship with the Zoo, it erked me to think that voters did not know or are being misinformed on this fact.
I heared our morning and afternoon radio talk show hosts both suggest that the Zoo should seek Corporate Sponsorship before asking for levy funding leading their listeners to believe that the Zoo was not already doing this.
If this is what they believed and did not want to support the Zoo levy that's fine, that's their choice. To attempt to persuade their listeners to vote NO, misleading them on misrepresentation of the facts really had my blood boiling.
It makes one pause to remember the historic lines from our Constitution's Preamble, "to promote the general Welfare..."
Ms. Thurber: during your short tenure in public office, did you 'promote the general Welfare of our citizens' or did you kowtow to the parochial needs of the few in order to satisfy the narrow views of your political interests?
I have grave misgivings about supporting any tax derived from the perceived value of my property.
If I do nothing to my property to maintain/improve it, ant therefore its' value, my taxes stay the same or go down.
However, if I do my darnedest to maintain and improve my property and thereby the surrounding neighborhood, I get slapped with higher taxes.
IMO, property taxes, except for maybe fire protection, have nothing to do with the value of my property and are therefore, inappropriate.
I do however, support consumption (a.k.a. sales) taxes, as everyone in the community pays. Those least able to pay consumption taxes consume less and in doing so, pay less taxes.
This also has the added benefit of tapping the underground economy every time someone spends their otherwise hidden income.
In reality, I may be taxed more than I am now, but that is my choice. Knowing that everyone is paying taxes gives me great comfort, immense satisfaction and a sense of well-being.
For the record, I support my zoo, but I will never vote for doing so with a property tax.
The Toledo Zoo lost my support the day that I discovered that Bill Dennler was not only a spendthrift, but he also abused taxpayer dollars (by living high off the hog).
Interesting article, added his blog to Favorites
Post a Comment