Ironton voters must decide on city#039;s safety
Published 12:00 am Sunday, October 30, 2005
One man, one vote. It is a simple phrase that represents the complex system our nation uses as part of its political process.
The phrase was used a number of times in our history, including during the early 1960s as blacks fought for the right to vote.
Today, the phrase stands as a testament to the fact that a single vote can change the focus of your city, state and nation.
Email newsletter signup
In short, your vote does count and it should never be taken for granted.
In nine days, voters in the county will head to the polls to decide upon all sorts of elected positions and public issues. And we hope all registered voters exercise their right to vote because our system of government is truly a government of the people and by the people when the people get involved.
Ironton area voters will face a bunch of city-specific options, two of which deserve much public consideration.
The first, and arguably the most important, is the floodwall levy. In 2004, the floodwall levy was defeated by tiny margin. At that time, the levy was simply a renewal levy, but apparently it fell victim to voters who were just frustrated by another tax.
We're not huge fans of taxes either, per se, but some taxes are critically important - and the floodwall levy is just such a tax. The tax funds the system of levees, floodwalls and pumps that help protect the city when the waters of the Ohio River rise. If passed, the levy will replace a $3 per household fee that was enacted as an emergency fix after the levy failed in 2004.
We urge all Ironton voters to vote “yes” on the floodwall levy. Doing so keeps us safe from Mother Nature's wrath.
In addition, we hope Ironton residents will approve the $10 municipal fee that is on the ballot as well. The City of Ironton is in poor financial shape. If something isn't done now, the city may quickly find itself where it was a couple of decades ago when it was bankrupt and the state had to step into the mix.
While we'd hoped that expense cuts would have greatly helped limit the need for a new fee, the administration hasn't made that happen so the fee may be the last hope. Without the fee, massive cuts in city services are likely.
A “yes” vote on the municipal fee delays those cuts and gives the city and its residents some additional time to discuss options for the future.
The path the city will take in the future are in the hands of the voters.
One man, one vote, one future.