I read with interest Charlie Vascellaro’s paid advertisement in last week’s Times regarding the proposed property tax. Unfortunately, it contains a number of factual errors. Since our citizens are weighing the pros and cons of such a tax, I think it is important that the record be corrected.
Allow me to go through his piece, paragraph by paragraph.
Fiction: You say that we have “10 years of facts on how our town did so well without a property tax.”
Fact: We didn’t do so well. Our roads are crumbling, the town’s infrastructure is in disrepair, and the council has been forced to make serious cuts in every annual budget. Fortunately, the reductions have not been visible to the public up to this point.
Fiction: “Not only do we not have a shortfall…we have had a $760,000 surplus in 2016.”
Fact: We had what you call a “surplus” because we deferred needed town improvements so that, in the event of a serious problem, the council could deal with it. Do you like the fountain? If we have to replace the liner in the lake (which is likely to occur sooner rather than later), it would cost $2-$3 million. And if our 40-year-old fountain pumps fail, we are talking about additional millions. We can’t simply print money.
Additionally, there are major concerns that Rural Metro (fire and rescue services), which has been bought out by a large national company, may decide that fire and rescue services for municipalities is not in their best financial interest. Should they cancel our contract it is estimated that setting up our own fire and rescue service will cost $600,000 to $1 million.
Fiction: “If we had a $7 million town property tax in 2008, the Council would have had $70 million dollars to spend”
Fact: The referendum in 2008 was for $4.5 million. But if the citizens had been asked for $7 million, as you suggest, we wouldn’t be facing a $6.4 million average annual deficit today, which will grow annually unless we deal with it now.And perhaps our roads would be in better shape. How much more money have our citizens spent on their home during that same period of time to maintain it and keep up your property value?
Fiction: “Under the proposal (in 2008) the council – without any vote from us, could raise the property tax 2 percent a year for those 10 years. That would have raised the tax to $8,532,960.”
Fact: Again, the referendum was for $4.5 million, not $7 million. And if the council raised the tax 2 percent per year, which is very unlikely given that most elected officials want to stay in office, the increase on an average-priced home in Fountain Hills ($305,967) would amount to a whopping $6.12 per year. And it is important to point
