WSP02351 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(0 CJ <t:::." itself. From a cost and revenue viewpoint it would be desirable for the city to annex the plant site, but this is deemed a remote possibility due to the distance involved and other problems. If the city were to rely entirely on the property tax as a source of funds, it would not be able to provide the needed additional services to the expanding population without taxing existing property much more heavily (raising the mill levy). In fact, to raise the $957,000 additional needed in 1977 by the property tax alone would require a levy of much more than 100 mills (the county levy in 1973 was 19.00 mills). A solution to this dilemma is for the city to institute a sales tax of 1 or 2 percent, to increase water and sewer tap fees, or both. A 1 percent sales tax combined with a doubling of water and sewer tap fees could poten- tially raise $517,400 by 1977, the year of peak expenditure needs. A 2 per- cent sales tax combined with a tripling of water and sewer tap fees would provide potential revenues of $1,002,200 by 1977. It is recommended that the city adopt a sales tax for the following reasons . 1. This is the best source available to the city to generate the funds needed to meet rising demands. 2. It will provide funds immediately when demands are made, not a year later after property is assessed and taxes collected. 3. It will be paid by transients and others who are in the community only a short time (construction workers) who are using the city's services but might otherwise escape taxation (if they rented, for example, and did not pay property taxes). 4. It is easy to collect (along with the state tax) and has a great ability to raise funds. A tax of only 2 cents per dollar of retail sales can generate $830,000 of revenue for the city in 1977. v