Residents need to cast informed vote on assessment

Residents need to cast informed vote on assessment

Thanks to Jim Parsons for filing a lawsuit to void the current ridiculous assessment increase vote. It simply can't be legal for owners of unimproved property to dictate an increase for those who actually live here. I believe most residents didn't understand how this was going to work. It reminds me of how the folks who wanted lifetime politicians in Arkansas orchestrated the ballot issue to pass the lengthening of term limits.

We can't simply stop paying assessments as then Bella Vista would quickly shut off the water. I for one, won't spend another dime in Bella Vista until this is resolved. That includes the activities cards that my wife and I have always renewed. I might suggest that nobody renew those cards. At least your water won't be shut off as a result.

You might be interested to know that the city of Bella Vista passed an ordinance allowing residents to have backyard chickens. No roosters and up to four hens only. The Architectural Control Committee ... declared no backyard chickens were allowed. Seems backward to me.

The Property Owners Association spent more than $600,000 to make a walking trail out of a golf course. The Branchwood course was a nice little nine-hole, par three course that allowed folks who maybe were not real good to play without holding up the better players. And it was very healthy and affordable. All of the equipment used to build the trail could have been used to repair the flood damage.

If you haven't yet voted, please cast an informed vote. Hopefully, the lawsuit will be successful.

John Barth

Bella Vista

Issues 6, 7 not good enough to earn 'For" vote

Both proposed marijuana amendments, issues 6 and 7, have flaws that cause me to oppose both. I dislike any amendment that writes a fixed dollar amount into the state Constitution, because any dollar amount that is appropriate in 2016 cannot be expected to be appropriate one hundred years from now. The two proposed amendments set (different) fixed dollar amounts for the fee to establish a cannabis dispensary. Issue 7 also sets fixed dollar amounts for certain penalties and for the maximum fine for criminal behavior on the part of a cannabis care center agent or testing lab agent.

Both proposed amendments require that sales tax be collected. Issue 6 distributes some of the revenue among various state agencies and some to the General Revenue fund. Issue 7, however, states that after administrative costs have been covered, any remaining revenue is returned to the distribution centers to subsidize costs for low-income users. Even if you regard the use of tax revenue to pay for cheap marijuana to be laudable, the fact remains Issue 7 generates no net tax revenue for the state.

In Issue 6, marijuana dispensaries are for-profit businesses, and their number is limited to 40 in the state. The effect of that is to limit a population the size of Fayetteville to a single distribution site, a legal monopoly. Issue 7 similarly would limit the number of dispensaries. Forget about the benefits from free competition.

Regardless of how I feel about marijuana use, these are flawed ballot proposals and I must vote no on both Issue 6 and Issue 7. There is no urgency; we can do better than this.

Roy Fuller

Fayetteville