If you liked Columbus City Schools’ 24 percent tax hike proposal last November (and most people didn't), you will love the Columbus Zoo’s 110 percent tax hike proposal coming this May. Voters overwhelmingly rejected the school’s proposed Issue 50 property tax levy boondoggle, and should do the same with the Zoo’s proposed Issue 6 property tax levy over­reach. Have these publicly­funded agencies lost their collective minds? The Columbus Zoo and Aquarium is asking voters in May to more than double the Franklin County property tax dollars directed toward the zoo, in large part to fund the Columbus Zoo’s third facility in central Ohio: a proposed $50­70 million new downtown zoo. Franklin County taxpayers have been very generous to the Zoo in the past, raising our property taxes twice to fund the Columbus Zoo (which, though located in Delaware County is not funded by Delaware County property taxes), and The Wilds (also owned by the Columbus Zoo, which, though located in Muskingum County, is not funded by Muskingum County property taxes). Franklin County taxpayers should not be asked to fund a third zoo when we are already funding two zoos in different counties, and when neither other county’s residents are providing funding to either of the existing zoos in their own counties. Anytime a public entity seeks to double its tax­funded budget, voters should be skeptical. Through this doubling of taxes, the percentage of the Zoo's total budget being funded by Franklin County residents would rise from 22 percent to 36 percent. A jump in the percentage of public funding is a jump in the wrong direction: the Zoo, which is an amenity and not a necessity, should be seeking to reduce public support over the long­term through expanding the many other sources of private support it has so successfully accessed in the past. Zoos, including the Columbus Zoo, do well with private funding ­­ in fact, half the zoos in the United States are funded entirely by private sources. And in this case, not only is the Zoo seeking to double up on its tax levy take, but it also wants the levy to be permanent – forever removing any accountability to the taxpaying public that would be providing the funding. Our critical levy funded systems that provide human services often required by federal or state law to our most vulnerable fellow citizens (e.g., public schools, services to senior citizens, child protective services, developmental disability services, mental health services and addiction services) remain accountable to the citizenry through levies that need periodic renewal by the voters. Indeed, both Columbus City Schools and Franklin County Children’s Services are expected to be on the ballot in November to seek renewal of their operating levies to simply maintain existing critical community services. A third zoo is a "want," not a "need." And certainly the Columbus Zoo, which does not provide critical human services to our most vulnerable fellow citizens, should provide no less on­going accountability than those critical human service systems do. But the Zoo wants a permanent levy with no on­going accountability to voters and taxpayers, and that approach is simply wrong. Franklin County residents do not need a new and third local zoo, we do not need a doubling of the Zoo’s property tax, we do not need a forever unaccountable publicly­funded entity, and fairness demands that if we are asked to pay so much that residents of other counties that benefit from our generosity also chip in and help pay some of the Zoo’s costs. The Zoo does not need to pass a levy next month, as there are three more elections before its current 10­year levy runs out at the end of 2015. A “no” vote in May will not cost the Columbus Zoo a dime. For these reasons and more, Issue 6 is a bad deal for Franklin County taxpayers. The Free Press urges a “no” vote on Issue 6, so the Zoo can come back to us with a reasonable levy request focused on existing facilities next year when it really needs public support.