Looking over the tentative annual budget for 2018/19, it appears that the funding forecasts the council has been discussing these past several years have been right on the money; specifically a lack of it.
The budget is balanced because, by law, it has to be. That means that, no matter what the expected shortfall is, the town has to make cuts to accommodate them. Anyone who has been following local news since about 2008 knows that the town has been doing exactly that; cutting deep into its staff and other areas in order to make the numbers work.
The question, then, is how many more cuts can the budget take? As noted in this week’s 1A story, it’s expected that the town’s expenditures will outpace its earnings by a little more than a million dollars per year for the next four years. If you stretch the outlook to 10 years, though, that number jumps to an average deficit of about $6.4 million per year between now and 2028/29.
This is, of course, exactly why the town is asking residents to consider a primary property tax. Even with all of the expected residential buildout, the forecast is that state shared funding and the sales tax alone will not knock a dent in the expected shortfalls.
Other ideas have been tossed around and proved wanting. Similarly, residents have made it known loud and clear that they were against potential alternatives such as a major attraction to draw folks to town.
The fact that the town council has held out on calling for a property tax vote for this long only shows the extent to which they hoped to avoid it. Their argument is that all other alternatives have been exhausted and, given the encouragement of many residents, now was the time to finally put the matter to a fresh vote.
We’re all ears when it comes to arguments for and against such measures. It’s a decision we’re taking very seriously, considering the impact it could have on Fountain Hills today and well into the future. We encourage our readers to do the same.
