1.a. The greatest possible quantity or degree.
b. The greatest quantity or degree reached or recorded; the upper limit of variation.
c. The time or period during which the highest point or degree is attained.
c. The time or period during which the highest point or degree is attained.
2. An upper limit permitted by law or other authority.
Don Quixote Note: When the annual tax that could be imposed can range from $55.86 annually to $125.22 annually on a $400,000 property dependent on the financial assumptions being used then one can look with some skepticism and angst as your City continues to advertise the lower value of $55.86 (or Cost per average household is approximately $5 per month in the YES VOTE part of ad) as the Estimated Maximum Annual Tax.
The best that an unbiased observer can call this number is "the amount that will occur if all the planets align simultaneously in such a manner that rates falls, rentals are fully collected, expansion of bureaucrabs are restricted over the borrowing term, operational costs tend towards zero, ETC.for other variables." (If you buy that one, I have some cheap swampland for sale)
Generally speaking statisticians would tell you that the Estimated Maximum Annual Tax tends to occur towards the END of a range of data rather than at the first value in that range.
The presentation of the number in this manner might not occur to a public relations department who is drawing up a YES slanted advertisement but since it is an unbiased ad paid for by all the taxpayers money (wait until you get this bill!) then a transparent, open and democratic council would insist upon a more rational and realistic comparison.
Will the next ad on Wednesday, Friday or Sunday contain such clarifications ? The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind and only Council can stop the blowing and provide "true accurate information for the public to use". That is what our "feerless leader" keeps on saying and a united Council will surely accede to these wishes ?
Don Quixote Note: When the annual tax that could be imposed can range from $55.86 annually to $125.22 annually on a $400,000 property dependent on the financial assumptions being used then one can look with some skepticism and angst as your City continues to advertise the lower value of $55.86 (or Cost per average household is approximately $5 per month in the YES VOTE part of ad) as the Estimated Maximum Annual Tax.
The best that an unbiased observer can call this number is "the amount that will occur if all the planets align simultaneously in such a manner that rates falls, rentals are fully collected, expansion of bureaucrabs are restricted over the borrowing term, operational costs tend towards zero, ETC.for other variables." (If you buy that one, I have some cheap swampland for sale)
Generally speaking statisticians would tell you that the Estimated Maximum Annual Tax tends to occur towards the END of a range of data rather than at the first value in that range.The presentation of the number in this manner might not occur to a public relations department who is drawing up a YES slanted advertisement but since it is an unbiased ad paid for by all the taxpayers money (wait until you get this bill!) then a transparent, open and democratic council would insist upon a more rational and realistic comparison.
Will the next ad on Wednesday, Friday or Sunday contain such clarifications ? The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind and only Council can stop the blowing and provide "true accurate information for the public to use". That is what our "feerless leader" keeps on saying and a united Council will surely accede to these wishes ?
No comments:
Post a Comment