CC 2020-06-23_11a Supplemental No 1MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JESSICA MATSON, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AGENDA ITEM 11a – JUNE 23, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CONSIDERATION AND DIRECTION REGARDING A PROPOSED
REVENUE MEASURE TO ADDRESS THE CITY’S FUTURE FUNDING
NEEDS
DATE: JUNE 22, 2020
Attached is correspondence received.
cc: Acting City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website (or public review binder)
Subject: Item 11-C consideration of the sales tax measure
Item 11-C
Mayor and Council:
Just a couple of quick observations
It is true that the tax rate has not gone up since 2006 but tax revenues have gone up considerably. In
2009-10 total General Fund revenues were $10,824,018, the 2019-20 general fund is forecast to be
$14,309,650 a 32% increase over 10 years.
It is also true that staff levels were reduced in 2010 and have not returned to those, but as
your opinion survey revealed most AG residents are satisfied with the service they receive. How
could that be maybe the city is more efficient, after all the “necessity is the mother of all invention”
or maybe we were receiving services that we didn’t need “who knew”?
A few things I hope you will keep in mind for your decision tonight. I hope you have time to give this
tax initiative a though vetting but I doubt it.
Don’t be greedy, a ½ cent increase is more than enough to keep moving forward with the infra-
structure maintenance projects we have. Could we responsibly spend 4 million a year? A 25%
increase in revenue, in a community that is already “satisfied” is begging for miss approbation and
waste.
Give the people a chance at what they actually want: The assurance that their tax will be spent to
make our city stronger now and, in the future, and will not be siphoned off for pet projects
or increased staff and salaries. A special tax for street and storm drain Maintenace would be a heavy
lift, but it is what the community wants and putting a 9-year sunset will help immensely to get to the
2/3’s.
Yes, a sunset clause will limit but not eliminate, the ability for the city to incur debt, for most AG
residents that would be a good thing. In fact, it could be a great argument against passing even at
50%.
As I have stated before I would be opposed to any general tax that can be redirected by future
councils away from the is intended use. its time to ensure that we do not just keep growing into the
funding available with more services, staff and salaries by dedicating funding to the maintenance of
our existing infrastructure.
Respectfully
Jim Guthrie
Mayor Ray Russom and Council Members:
It has been an honor to have the Community Service Grant Program named after me for the last few
years.
It was a pretty cool observation some more years back when I saw an opportunity to simplify the
CBDG funding and reporting process for the city by dedicating all the funding to low income serving
construction projects (primary ADA improvements). We then back filled the nonprofit portion with
funding from the general fund that would have spent on similar or often the exact same projects.
It was gratifying to see staff quickly turn it into a reality, allowing more nonprofits to participate
From: James Guthrie [
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:32 PM
To: Caren Ray Russom; Keith Storton; Kristen Barneich; Lan George; Jimmy Paulding
by simplifying the qualifying and reporting requirements for them as well.
That said, it is actually a community program, funded by the city for services delivered by the
community, so I think it is time to return it to its original name Community Service Grant Program
Respectfully
Jim Guthrie