LETTER: A different take on the Henderson parks ballot question

I read with interest the Saturday letter from former Henderson Mayor Debra March and Liz Baldizan promoting the renewal of an expiring property tax that partially funds Henderson park operations. Their comments raise a number of questions and, in some cases, seem very misleading.

I am very much supportive of a great public park system, and funding for it should be included in the city’s general budget, which should be crafted with flexibility and transparency and not with tax tricks.

Regarding this specific tax element, I cannot find this tax on my property tax bill, nor can I find it in the exhaustive list of property tax recipients on the county assessor’s website. If it is hidden in another tax, which one is it? If this special tax is hidden in another tax, how many others of the 78 tax recipients on the assessor’s full list also include unknown or unstated special or expiring taxes?

This tax is clearly set to expire in 2027, according to the city of Henderson’s website that discusses pros and cons of Measure 1. How can the former mayor then state that, if we vote “no,” we would still pay the tax, but that it would instead go to another unrelated entity, namely Clark County? A “no” vote to renewing an expiring tax cannot possibly create another new tax.

Indeed, the city’s own website indicates, “If this question fails, property owners who currently benefit from property tax cap regulations may not see a reduction in their property tax obligations.” This certainly implies that other property owners could see a reduction in their property taxes. Who would fall in each case?

This Henderson City Measure 1 should be pulled from the ballot and replaced with a revised measure that provides full clarity to properly inform the voters.