Letters: City needs to live within its means
City needs to live within its means
I, too, am against the city annexing our property on N.C. 150. Our land consists of eight acres used only for pasture. There are no homes or buildings on this property. This land has been in our family for almost 100 years.
If this annexation plan is passed and our yearly taxes double due to the city taking us in, taxes will be very difficult for everyone to pay. Economically speaking, times are tough for all of us already.
If the City Council members really care about this community like they said they did when they campaigned for office, they would take a second look at this proposal and not force an economic burden on us, our neighbors and the residents of the existing city limits with higher taxes that will come with annexation.
We will not benefit from city sewer, water or garbage service, but will have to pay city taxes anyway, whether we use these services or not.
Like all the residents of the N.C. 150 area, we already support Salisbury generously by shopping there and doing business there and resent the fact that the City Council insinuates we haven’t paid our share for the services we receive.
Has the city thought about the consequences of its actions other than just getting people’s money?
People will be hard-pressed for money to pay their bills, give their tithes to churches and charities, educate their children and provide basics for their families.
The city of Salisbury needs to adopt a “live within your means” philosophy like we do because it seems their only reason for annexing the N.C. 150 area is to get more tax money. Despite the attitude of the city officials and staff, bigger isn’t always better! We are managing just fine without the city.
ó Sandra Owen
How would you feel?
Our family has lived in Rowan all our lives on property that used to be known as Route 6. Then it was renamed Lincolnton Road, and now it is called Mooresville Road/Highway 150.
The parcels of land that our family owns stretch from Carillon Assisted Living to Gospel Light Church and are being annexed by the city. This land has been in our family outside the city limits since before 1900 for farm use and family residences. Currently there are only two homes on the property. A house sits on a 1-acre tract, and another house sits on a 5-acre tract. The other land is in separate tracts owned by various family members, is used for horses and totals about 27 acres ó which will be annexed.
We have paid our county tax through the years and have everything we need on our property for our household needs now. Paying city taxes will not bring any new benefits to our family. It will only bring more expenses. We ask each City Council member individually, how would you feel to be on the other end of this forced annexation deal?
ó David & Kim Holshouser