On its agenda for Tuesday, Aug. 13, the Town Council will contemplate the implementation of a $185 annual public safety fee to help offset the rising costs of law enforcement and fire and emergency medical services in the town.

The fee would be assessed on parcels in the town, and it would be a flat fee regardless of land use – residential commercial or vacant. That is similar to the manner in which the town currently collects a $35 annual fee for environmental services. That fee would be discontinued, however $35 of the new fee would be set aside in the environmental fund used for the costs of permits and mandated activity related to storm water management.

The remaining $150 would be earmarked for public safety services, although there are no immediate plans to establish a public safety fund, according to Town Manager Grady Miller. The money would be placed in the town’s General Fund. Although the public has indicated it would want to see the money designated specifically to public safety, Miller said auditors have advised against establishing another new fund for the town.

While the new fee is expected to generate approximately $2.5 million annually for the town, the current contracts with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and Rural/Metro to provide the services total approximately $8 million. That means the $2.5 million would cover only a little more than a quarter of the public safety costs, leaving little question the funds should be used in that manner.

The town has been using a Florida company, AMS, to handle the billing for the environmental fee. Miller said the town has already begun to explore other possibilities for collection. He said other options have come to their attention since the environmental fee was implemented. The town would like to use an Arizona company, Miller said, and staff is preparing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to find a new vendor. Those other possibilities include Rural/Metro, according to Miller.

The town also has its attorney exploring the town’s ability to assure compliance with the fee and follow up on delinquencies, something it did not do with the environmental fee.

One of the reasons the town has had to deal with runaway costs of law enforcement with MCSO is the state’s beleaguered public safety pension plan. Poor management and poor investing has plagued the plan for a number of years and the state legislature has been unwilling or unable to correct the situation. Now nearly every municipality and county in the state is faced with the uncontrollable costs of maintaining the fund.

Miller said some cities are in a positive revenue situation and have been able to buy down some of the pension debt, but those are few. Fountain Hills, however, as a contract community to county law enforcement has little option but to pay what it costs the county for the pensions of its employees working here.

The fee proposal came to the forefront after local voters rejected another property tax proposal in May of 2018. The idea was brought up by Councilman David Spelich, elected in August of 2018, who had run and won election on his staunch opposition to the property tax.

Spelich had proposed a community infrastructure fee that would span four years and sunset. He in fact opposed the proposal for the new public safety fee because it does not include an end date in which it would no longer be collected. He felt the four-year proposal would be enough time for the economy to develop and improve the town’s revenue situation.

Over the past 20 years, from FY01/02 through FY19/20 the town’s General Fund budget has increased by 35.8 percent, while over the same period the costs for public safety services have jumped by 99 percent, or nearly doubled.

While Miller says he still believes the town is getting a bargain for these services, it was suggested the town explore its options for other providers or implementing its own police and fire operations.

Miller said recently that he has received no direction from the council to explore a public safety study for the town; he also said he has heard nothing of a volunteer committee being established to study the issue.

A sales tax increase is pretty straightforward but for our July 31 edition, we will look at that issue.