4) What is your position on funding for jointly funded projects with Vance County?
Mayor
James David (Pete) O’Geary (no incumbent in race): No response submitted.
Jeanne Hight (no incumbent in race): I HAVE NO TROUBLE WITH JOINTLY FUNDING FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY HOWEVER, I WOULD INSIST ON THE FUNDING TO BE DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR IN MY OPINION THE CITIZENS OF HENDERSON HAVE TOO LONG PAID MORE THEN THEIR FAIR SHARE.
Ward 1
Mary Emma Evans (Incumbent): No response submitted.
George W. King, Sr. (Challenger): I support all of the current programs that we have that help the city of Henderson and want these programs to continue to receive full funding. I. also support fair taxing and would support taxing to be as fair as it could possibly be, keeping our programs funded.
Ward 1 At Large
Bernard Alston (Incumbent): No response submitted.
Sara Coffey (Challenger): I would like to work with the county to gradually equalize the amount that city taxpayers contribute toward joint funding ventures.
Ward 2
Bobby Gupton (Incumbent): There is no justification for the city taxpayers (Individual or Businesses ) to contribute 80-85 percent of the total contribution of the city and county for all joint projects. Every taxpayer of the city and county should contribute equally; they share the services equally and should fund the services equally.
Mike Rainey (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 2 At Large
Lynn Harper (Incumbent): I support fully funding all programs of the City and County as much as financially possible. I’m sure that when the Joint Programs were set up, there were good reasons for the funding by both City and County.
If the city’s part of the funding comes from property taxes, the City taxpayer, who has already paid equal to County residents when he paid his County taxes, pays again through his city taxes.
If the city’s part of the funding comes from sales taxes, the City is drawing from only 28% of the total taxes raised in this county–as the county gets the other 72% of sales taxes.
Either way, the Joint Funding percentages need to be studied for each of these programs. Hopefully, most can be funded like the schools and Animal Control–equally by each tax payer through County Taxes.
Michael Inscoe (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 3
Garry Daeke (Incumbent): I believe these programs are valuable, and could not be provided by either party alone at the same level. We certainly cannot go to partners we (previous council) solicited to assist with programming and then tell them we are no longer interested! Collaborative negotiations dictate that everyone comes together for a single purpose, and everyone leaves with something positive. For example, a better environment for the city/county negotiations on joint funding would include a dialogue with the county on what the city can do to assist with their plans for county wide water distribution since we are in that business, with a commitment from the county to assist with some of the joint funded programs.
The city, the county, nor anyone in a partnership, cannot dictate the terms from one side and expect positive results.
Frank Terry (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 3 At Large
Brenda Peace (Challenger): No response submitted.
Elissa Yount (Incumbent): I propose that every tax bill have a separate line item for joint funding projects. A city tax payer would have an amount for city taxes, for county taxes, and for joint funding. A county tax payer would have an amount for county taxes and for joint funding. The tax payer, whether a business or an individual in the city, should not have to pay more than a county tax payer for the very same services.
Ward 4
Horace P. Bullock (Challenger): No response submitted.
Lonnie Davis (Incumbent): No response submitted.
Ward 4 At Large
George Daye (Challenger): No response submitted.
Lora Durham (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ranger Wilkerson (Incumbent): I wish citizens could/would understand the real ratio of the City/County joint funding.
I am all for the joint funding; I’m just against the ratio of funded projects.