Letter to the editor: Property tax system must change | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Property tax system must change

The archaic school tax has been used to fund education since the 1830s. My home 0f 39 years cost $40,000, with current Deer Lakes tax at $3,600. I’ve paid for it almost three times over. I’m over 70 with no children and a low to moderate fixed income. My mother, a widower who owned her home for 50 years, had to sell her home in 2005 because of the tax. My parents bought that home new in 1955 for $13,500. Her school tax in Shaler when she sold was $1,500 per year.

Opposition to changing the current system lies mainly with teachers unions, school boards and senators. Senators voting against school tax relief in 2016 were:

• Democrats: John Blake, Jay Costa, Lawrence Farnese, Arthur Haywood, Vincent Hughes, Shirley Kitchen, Daylin Leach, John Sabatina, Christine Tartaglione, Rob Teplitz, Sean Wiley, Anthony Williams and Gov. Tom Wolf.

• Republicans: Michele Brooks, Jake Corman, John Gordner, Stewart Greenleaf, Scott Hutchinson, Thomas McGarrigle, Chuck McIlhinney, Dominic Pileggi, Tommy Tomlinson, Pat Vance, Kim Ward and Gene Yaw.

We need to elect candidates who support the people. Thanks to Sen. David Argall and David Baldinger, of the Pennsylvania Taxpayers Cyber Coalition, for their support of the Property Tax and Independence Act, Senate Bill 76. View this bill and perform your own calculations and savings. Everyone in Pennsylvania should be responsible for funding. Write to your representatives.

John Lambert

West Deer

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.