Mr. Golucci last week asks a number of questions about a potential property tax referral. Many of his questions can simply be answered by asking town staff or going onto the town’s website and reviewing all of the research, the analysis and all of the revenue options.
Or one could listen to recordings of the debates from council minutes and all of the work that many have done for several years to solve the problem – sales tax revenue, as a major source of government financing, will never be adequate or sustainable. Also this very paper has covered most of these issues for many years.
If these readily obtainable answers were known by the Lagoon Advisory Committee (of which Mr. Golucci was a member) maybe we could have saved $38,000 on an ill-advised study. Yet he questions the council’s ability to make appropriate decisions for how the proceeds from a property tax would be allocated? It appears condescending to ask if the council knows what tax rates are for surrounding communities. Again, information that is easily accessible on the internet and part of prior discussions.
However, the most important thing Mr. Golucci should understand is that the “problem” is not debt. The problem is cash flow. So I’m not sure how he concludes that this is about “throwing more money at the same problem.” The additional revenue from a property tax is intended to do exactly that; fix the frequently discussed and well-known cash flow problem.
If he truly wants to know “the plan,” it is outlined and I’m sure staff would be more than willing to share sources. “Doing more of the same” is to ignore the facts as we have done for years; sales taxes cannot, will not ever provide sustainable or adequate revenue for Fountain Hills.
