Cable Bills Statement to Council

Read charter section 7-90 (h)(2). In 1991, voters specifically ended City cable taxes. This is not a fee, even by lax court definitions. It is not targeted to benefit those paying the cost.  It is allegedly for general public benefit (the court definition of a tax). It goes to the general fund, not a special fund. It is government revenue, not a private fee. It is a 226% tax increase on cable customers--over $41 per year. That is just lunch to a liberal, but it may be a week's groceries to fixed-income seniors in my district.

It is not needed. People can get information from the library, the city's website, Google, Siri, or dozens of other sources in this Information Age. They might even ask a question of their elected officials!

It is unfair to make cable users pay 100% of the cost for a program of supposed general public benefit. It can also be used by non-city residents. It will require growing government. How is having SEVEN City propaganda channels a high priority, compared to police, fire, roads, and drainage? It may appeal to Big Brother, but it's cruel to Little Taxpayer.

The Gazette mentions a $100 million suit against Comcast by the Washington state attorney general for 1.8 MILLION contract violations, squeezing citizens for tens of millions of dollars. Our City should not be in bed with corporate racketeers. I am a victim of Comcast, too.

I oppose the City taking our TABOR tax refunds this April. My colleagues must stop piling on with cumulative tax increases. They wisely retreated on the parks tax. They also need to reject this unwise cable tax and revoke their illegal $460 MILLION obligation with Pueblo County.