But my second email to the city manager's office resulted in another acknowledgement AND the following email response from Sharon McDonald:
- Because the COR office reported that Mr. Riddick is delinquent in his taxes, why have his wages not been garnished to pay the outstanding taxes?
- Why was Mr. Riddick issued a renewal of his business license even though he was delinquent in his taxes?
That was nice to get a response. While infuriating, I guess I can accept the co-mingling of personal and business assets has to remain independent. But the business license answer is crazy. Does that mean prior to this year if I owed the city $10K and applied for my license renewal, it would have been granted? So I sent Ms. McDonald, the following email:
Thank you for your timely response.
My question now is, prior to the passing of this ordinance, what has been the city’s response to delinquent business taxes? If license renewal has been independent of tax collection, what has been in place to require payment of taxes?
I will let you know if I hear anything back.