At the special council session of March 23rd, Hizzoner directed the town manager to "put the notice" of an increase of .25" in the sales tax on the town web site.
They're in a big rush to push this down our throats.
Oh yes, they also are eager to approve pay raises for town employees, especially those "poor souls" earning less than $60,000! Unbelievable. Unemployment at 10%. No increase in social security benefits for three consecutive years. But Oro Valley, why they can just spend and spend and spend. This tax and spend philosophy was strongly supported by the Appointed One, Steve Solomon, by Mary Snider and by Hizzoner.
TAX AND SPEND
That's the new by word of Oro Valley.
You guys simply gotta watch the last five minutes of this special session. Here's the link.
They are like "kids in a candy shop", spending Daddy's money!
That'd be funny. Except ITS YOUR MONEY!
----
8 comments:
The Zee Man seems a litte aggravated, if I read the last two posting correctly....
Our town does not provide some pretty basic very important services, and has elected to sub this work out or not provide any at all. For example....
Fire and Emergency Medical Services - Why not take explore the possibility of taking over this service, and the large revenue stream that would result in a take over. This is a basic responsibility a gov't assumes
Waste Management Services - The town has no arrangements for waste to be collected from households. Instead of watching a revenue souce be thrown away, why not explore arrangements with waste disposal companies that would result in a new revenue source.
Economic Development/Tourism - For some unknown reason we provide funds to TREO. I'm not sure how and why this came about, but this is something a local gov't would want to control.
Since OV does not provide three pretty basic services, then our council members really needs to justified why this budget cannot be balanced without increased or new taxes. The Mayor needs sharpen his pencil, and stop the speeches ( I thought he was auditioning for the leading role in "Music Man").
Also, I'm not sure but do we still fund the library? If we do then why, and this money should be cut from the budget.
Two observations:
1) Christopher is correct in his reference to the Zee Man. The more we know, the more aggravated we get.
2) "Turtle" speaks words of wisdom. He is echoing our friend, Council Member Bill Garner, whose credo is: "Think outside the box."
Right on Turtle!
I agree with the Zee Man!
Do not forget Solomon's constant concerns for the businesses in Oro Valley. He is concerned an increased utility tax will be a burden on the business community. Again, no concern for the residents. The business community will pass the utility tax on to their customers; thus, the citizens face double taxation on utilities.
Solomon has no concern that increased utility and property taxes will be a burden on many residents.
If they want to raise fees on the pool, ball fields, racquetball courts, ramada rentals, etc., that is fine because YOU CHOOSE whether or not to utilize these things.
Same for liquor license fees and application fees. No one is forced to open a restaurant or apply for a liquor license.
But we have no choice on whether or not to use gas, electric, and water. These are NECESSITIES and should not be taxed at all.
VC..
You are quite correct. Water is a necessity. Electricity and Gas are also necessities. Yet, communities tax them.
They do so because they can.
We don't object.
And they can simply tack on the billing to an existing system of billing.
So, unless we stand up and scream: "I'm not gonna take it anymore", they will continue to tax us until we drop.
And yes, Christopher, I am aggravated that the new council and mayor or acting just like the previous council. To even talk of tax increases when there is at least $5million in cost reductions that should be considered is an abomination.
The Cops are the sacred cows. They are being protected by this council because they paid for this council.
Wake up Oro Valley!
To paraphrase Councilman Steve Solomon (the appointed one) at the March 23, 2011 Town Budget Study Session on the subject of the police “Take Home Cars” he stated his opinion that the subject had been studied again and again and he for one did not want the subject of “Take Home Cars” discussed in the future. So much for the “freedom of speech”!!! The person asking the question was not an “ordinary citizen” but an elected councilman Bill Garner representing his constituents.
I did not know that Steve Solomon had such an extensive background in accounting and taxation. Perhaps he could educate us on the following questions:
Questions about Commuting Costs related to Take Home Vehicles?
1. Does the Town of Oro Valley pay for all the driving costs (gas, oil, maintenance) for the 68 Take Home Vehicles? How much is this on a daily, weekly or monthly basis?
2. How much does the individual town employee share in the driving costs?
3. If the individual town employee does not contribute to the driving costs does the Town reflect this cost as an employee benefit for budget purposes?
4. Has the driving costs of the “take home vehicles” been vented with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to make sure that this is an employee benefit that is not taxable to the employee?
Questions about Depreciation Costs related to Take Home Vehicles?
1. What effect does the “take home vehicles” have on the depreciation expense recovery for the vehicles (increased usage due to taking cars home may accelerate the depreciation expense so the extra wear and tear on the vehicle may cause the vehicle to be replaced sooner at an increased cost to the Town)?
2. Has the policy of Take Home Vehicles been fully vented to determine if this potential accelerated depreciation has caused more short-term expense (replacement of vehicles) in the budget?
John Musolf
Post a Comment