Are Elected City Leaders in Mesa Un-Informed and Lack Financial Knowledge ??

To Subsidize Development or Not?

Often-uninformed city leaders struggle with the decision, and taxpayers pay the price for their lack of financial knowledge.
by William Fulton | August 2016               

About the Author: Here's a guy that's been inside government, like a lot of current members of the Mesa City Council, who now holds a position as a director of urban research. He thinks that city leaders are often uninformed to make decisions . . .

William Fulton  |  Columnist bfulton@rice.edu

William Fulton is the director of the Kinder Institute for Urban Research at Rice University and the author of Guide to California Planning and The Reluctant Metropolis. Fulton came to Rice from California where he served as the planning director for the City of San Diego. He formerly served as mayor, deputy mayor and a member of the city council in the City of Ventura, California.

All his columns reported in Urban Notebook can be found here 

Why is your MesaZona blogger writing this post?

To get right to the point [and borrow a phrase] The future of Mesa is on the line . . . .  from what yours truly has seen and heard and watched at multiple Mesa City Council meetings and study sessions and so-called "citizen advisory boards and committees" for planning and zoning and economic development, whatever the intentions and interests may or may not be for constituents or special interests, those elected or nominated to serve and members of the public oftentimes are un-informed on issues under consideration for discussion.

Case in point directly related to the question posed by columnist Bill Fulton is the action taken by the Mesa City Council to approve a taxpayer-funded item appearing on the November ballot in the General Election for a $100 Million ASU/Downtown plan that would radically transform a central public space into a campus for transient students.

Two other institutions for higher learning have been attracted here with financial incentives and subsidies. In five years neither one has succeeded in enrolling more than 400 students.

One - Benedictine University - was handed leases on two vacant city-owned buildings, has invested what they claim is $13 Million downtown, and while attracting more students into certain programs and athletics, is still far short of what was initial projected growth.

Taxpayer-approved Bond Issues - in the last few elections - have increased the chunk of the city expenditures budget pie where debt service payments already take out about 25% or $380 Million of last year's FY2015/16 Total City Budget.

You can see that about another $75 Million above that amount - or about $375 Million - is spent on "Personal Services".

Let's translate that for you: salaries + benefits, including health insurance and pension for city employees, including Police and Fire.Medical.

Since the city is reluctant to face more scrutiny and take on more debt service obligations draining the budget, or to take any action to revise or reduce city employee benefits including retirement, or to make real estate developers pay the cost for services residents need where they build houses, every taxpayer will get hit with an increase in sales taxes for almost every purchase transaction they make.

Projected sales tax income resources for this 2016/17 are tagged at $192.8 Million, while city income from sales and charges for services provided is the biggest chunk of income: over $408 Million.

Now the City of Mesa wants to hit taxpayers with an increase in sales [TPT] taxes to foot the bill for a questionable "Pie-In-The-Sky" plan ???

At the same time tangling up that scheme with funding for increased expenses for Police-Fire/Medical services?

 

Who gets hits with an increase in sales taxes?

 

 

TAKE A GOOD LOOK