"Saugatuck Township asks voters to approve new tax to fight lawsuits seeking lower property taxes"

That's a headline from a Michigan paper. If you owned property there, how would you vote?(link)

I'd vote against the tax, and frankly I don't think it's constitutional. At the very least, it is not within the scope of our legal model in the U.S. Everyone has the opportunity sue without being taxed or paying the opposing attorneys. It seems to me that they're property taxes are out of line or the township would be winning these suits.

But then I am a bit jaded because we just got our property tax bill...and our school district just tried to get a $174,000,000 referendum through, to "update" our high school. That's quite an update! Fortunately, it failed. Our property taxes are way out of line.

I think the absurdity lies in asking taxpayers to fund a fight against those who want to prevent such funding.

Here is a similar absurd story from a town in England.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
I think the absurdity lies in asking taxpayers to fund a fight against those who want to prevent such funding.

Here is a similar absurd story from a town in England.

I confess I can't see much similarity except in absurdity.

In fact, this story has been covered elsewhere and I believe it was simply a case of a rather ignorant clerk making an absurd statement and a customer deciding to make a story from it. It's certainly not the official position of the Department for Work and Pensions.