At last night's Oro Valley Council study session, it was 'round & round' on how to try to convince the voters on funding the Naranja Park.
Basically, as we understood it, having attended the meeting, there were two ideas, one costly to the tax payers; the other more costly to the tax payers.
One option, being "pushed" by Mayor Loomis & Terry Parish was to go to the voters for a Nov 2008 vote asking for a secondary property tax, via a bond issue in the amount of $150 million.
The idea was, get it all, and build it in increments, starting with phase 1 in the spring of 2009 for a cost of $48 million. The other two phases wouldn't start until approximately Sept 2013 & 2017 at a cost of $69 million & $37 million respectively.
The other Council Members seemed to be concerned on "selling" a "one time" $150 million bond issue, and were leaning toward Option 2----a $40-50 million price, which was thought to be more palatable to the voters.
Either way it is presented, and approved, we can expect an additional tax in the amount of $10-$12 dollars per month----- if you're home is assessed at $300,000.
Oh---by the way, a couple of caveats.
The town attorney pointed out, if the voters decline this additional expenditure, as it is presented, the town can keep putting it on the ballot until it is approved. This is known as "wearing down the opposition."
Secondly, and I noted this in my opportunity to address the council----we must be diligent in reading the fine print in the proposition, if and when it is presented. For example, the ballot may say, you are voting to approve a bond issue to fund the Naranja Park, for 2 baseball fields, 2 soccer fields, jogging trails , and "other amenities required." Don't let the vagueness fool you. It's a way municipalities get things through, and the voter then claims, "I didn't vote for an amphitheater and aquatic center."
In any case, this was only a study session. You will definitely hear more in the coming months.
One last thing. Come March 2008, there is a potential to replace 3 council members; Dankwerth, Parish & Gillaspie. You can expect this expenditure to be passed well before the election.
5 comments:
Once they "educate" us into taxing ourselves, meaning they get their foot in the door, or hand in our pockets, do they then have the ability to keep increasing this amount?
So then each time our property tax or assessment goes up this amount goes up.
We are fine with paying taxes for essential services but if our town can't handle the current expenses of running the town, why keep adding to that expense?
Is it job security for town administration?
In my opinion this theme park is not necessary , so let private concerns pay for it.
We are not a big city by any means so why should we pay for this theme park that most will not use?
Seems this town council is hell bent on thinking of idea's to spend money they don't have.
When I bought a condo back East about 15 years ago, I refused to buy one that had a pool or a tennis court or a golf course or all three because I wasn't going to pay a high condo fee to maintain all of these things that I would never use. I wasn't going to pay to support other people's hobbies or athletic activities.
That's what the Naranja Town Park amounts to. I'll be charged a property tax to fund other people's leisure time activities. I don't see anyone else paying to support my photography hobby.
I agree with Ms. Coyote. Property taxes should pay for essential services...things that we all NEED, not things that some people WANT. Let them pay for it with a user fee so the people who actually use it will also be the people who pay for it.
"will you deny our children soccer fields or swimming pools because you won't pay $10 or $15 a month?"
Our tax and spend council will want it worded that way.
Supposedly the pushed the utility tax thru to pay for more police. Why did we need more police? Do we have some crime here they are not telling us about.
If this tax/bond gets passed it will lead to more hiring thus more spending. It will never end.
Time for these people to get their darn fingers and paws out of my pockets!!
We beter mobilize early and often.
The swimming pool, water park feature, is the clincher for me! Water is a precious commodity in the desert and those of us that have pools are asked to cover them and keep our water usage to a minimum. Shouldn't they practice what they preach? The users fees that will be imposed on the water park, couldn't possibly cover the true costs. Insurance alone, not to mention additional police, because in addition to the families, let's be honest, it will draw some less than desirable characters.
Post a Comment