The passage of a $7 million primary property tax is not a decision that should be made lightly. As many have noted, it’s a lot of money, there’s no guarantee on where that money will be spent and, while possible, it’s unlikely it will ever go away.

But after months of speaking with community members, reading letters, chatting with council members and town staff and reading through the studies, The Times believes that this tax’s passage is the community’s best path forward.

We’ve seen arguments that more time should be taken, more studies conducted and those that have already been conducted should be double checked. Our concern is that waiting any longer will only allow the hole – which eventually needs filling – to grow that much deeper.

The decision to call for a primary property tax vote was not made overnight. It’s taken many years for the local leadership to finally put it on a ballot, and only then after much convincing. The fact that our mayor and every member of council is in support of the tax speaks volumes to us, especially since some were staunch opponents of a tax up until this point. Their support is backed by multiple projections, numerous studies both in-house and contracted to third parties, a citizen’s initiative including thousands of local participants and more debates and discussions than we can count.

We’ve witnessed firsthand the amount of belt tightening that has taken place in Fountain Hills. We’re not going to say that every dollar spent seemed prudent, but we feel the years of solid decisions far outweigh the handful of questionable instances that continue to drive discussions of distrust. We’ve watched town staff shrink by two-thirds and new initiatives take form with the specific goal of saving the town money without turning to a tax. Fountain Hills has indeed managed a lot with a little.

The problem is that “little” is about to become “even less” and we’re quickly running out of adaptive options. We all have our own opinions but, in order to gain a sound understanding of the situation facing Fountain Hills, we’ve turned to the men and women who make it their job to truly comprehend the variables at play. Nearly every study and professional opinion town staff has sought or conducted leads us to believe that a primary property tax is the most reasonable, fair course of action. Most of us are just observers, whereas these folks have gotten down in the dirt, dug through the numbers and seen point-blank the cracks that have formed over the years following the recession.

What’s left to cut at this point? How will the town afford vital projects if it isn’t able to set aside a sufficient reserve? The math shows that bonds are a bandage typically applied after an issue arises and, even then, they are frequently more costly and less effective than a sustainable revenue source. They also cannot be used for many of the town’s needs. The recent IMS study highlights the fact that our roads will never be properly maintained at their current rate of repair and previous assessments have shown that operating our own fire and police force would be less effective and more costly.

If the primary property tax does not pass, the town will not fall apart overnight. But those cracks mentioned earlier will grow, slowly but surely. Without a reliable, sufficient source of funding, the need will soon outpace the means, and that’s not a situation we want to find ourselves in.

Our town staff, elected officials and outside consultants have made that very argument across the board. We trust that they’ve done their jobs well. And if that trust is ever given sufficient reason to falter, there are contingencies we citizens may fall back on to correct the matter.

Outside of some limited, special circumstances, growing towns eventually hit a point where the community itself has to pick up a bit more of the burden if its members want to continue enjoying the same quality of life. We’re willing to take responsibility for our share of Fountain Hills.