Personal take on actions taken in Mifflin County
To the editor:
I have read many letters to the editor that discussed the merits of experience vs. change with regards to the current race for judge in Mifflin County. Both sides can present applicable reasons why either one is better than the other, and why it alone should be the basis for a voter’s decision on Election Day. With regard to that question, I would like to offer this comment: Experience without wisdom is worthless.
I was recently contacted by a concerned Mifflin County resident and asked to share my knowledge of experiences that have taken place in Mifflin County’s court.
In order to do this I would like to present the following questions to the candidates:
1. In a court supervised auction of tax delinquent property that was opened to public participation, should the recipient of the monies that are generated after the satisfaction of the delinquent taxes, be allowed to bid in the auction? In other words, should a bidder benefit from the proceeds of an auction? The answer would seem to be an obvious “no” but somehow this is not the decision that was tendered in Mifflin County’s court.
2. Outside the realm of eminent domain and under the jurisdiction of the Real Estate Tax Law, should the benefits of ownership of personal property be denied an individual so that the state can own the property and make it available to the general public? Is it wrong for an individual to personally benefit through private ownership of real estate? The answer would seem to be an obvious “no” but somehow this is not the decision that was tendered in Mifflin County’s court.
If the residents of Mifflin County wish to continue bidding against a stacked deck and to relinquish the private ownership of real estate to the government, then by all means vote for experience on Election Day.