Reporting on 2007
It's January, and time to state goals for the coming year. This I shall do---later. First, however, I need to account for last year's goals.
I articulated my 2007 goals last January, then reported progress in June. Here's where they stand today:
1. Support the Mayor's outlined objectives: Secondary irrigation is well underway and the sensitive lands ordinance was adopted. Transportation initiatives, downtown revitalization, and broadband transitioning are still in progress.
2. Become a Tree City, USA. The requirements were met and the application submitted. See my blog entries here, here, and here.
3. Upgrade the Arts Council by-laws. New by-laws were adopted in August and a governing board was appointed in November. More here, here, and here.
4. Establish a partnership with The Music School to stabilize Concerts in the Park. This was a successful partnership. May the 2008 series be equally successful.
5. Inventory the library's holdings. Here I did not succeed. The Library's Collection Development Policy, adopted in 2007, contains this statement:
When at first you don't succeed, reevaluate. With or without an assessment tool, two essential facts remain: Our collection is significantly outdated, and our collection budget figures at one-third to one-half that of comparable libraries. Needless to say, a new goal for addressing the problem will appear on my list for 2008.
6. Establish strong public communications policies and procedures. January's water bill included a redesign of the newsletter that I can live with. Next up: the City Web site.
7. Create a mission statement for Economic Development. Done. See post here.
8. Install and repair sidewalks in the Shelley School Area. See post, here. This is still under design. The wheels of government, especially federal government, turn much too slowly for my liking.
9. Finally finish the parks bond by installing curb and gutter at Art Dye. This is still not finished, and I'm fit to be tied. Why such delays, you ask? The short answer is: Red tape. This one goes back on the list for 2008.
10. Do all the above with no tax increases. Yes, we made it through 2007 with no tax increases. I dislike paying my taxes as much as anybody -- but we're not likely to make more progress on arts, parks, or the library without raising dedicated revenues for these causes. This is why the Council is considering asking the voters in 2008 for a RAP tax or a library tax. Or some combination of both. For further information, read Caleb Warnock's article in Friday's Daily Herald.
I articulated my 2007 goals last January, then reported progress in June. Here's where they stand today:
1. Support the Mayor's outlined objectives: Secondary irrigation is well underway and the sensitive lands ordinance was adopted. Transportation initiatives, downtown revitalization, and broadband transitioning are still in progress.
2. Become a Tree City, USA. The requirements were met and the application submitted. See my blog entries here, here, and here.
3. Upgrade the Arts Council by-laws. New by-laws were adopted in August and a governing board was appointed in November. More here, here, and here.
4. Establish a partnership with The Music School to stabilize Concerts in the Park. This was a successful partnership. May the 2008 series be equally successful.
5. Inventory the library's holdings. Here I did not succeed. The Library's Collection Development Policy, adopted in 2007, contains this statement:
As the American Fork community grows rapidly, the ability to assess and meet the informational and recreational reading needs of the community is critical to providing the quality library services and collections that are expected by our citizens.I had envisioned an assessment tool to allow us to list, for each decade of the Dewey decimal system, the strengths and weaknesses of our collection. The librarians, however, have persuaded me that library science does not include such precise measurement techniques. How exactly do we establish what the core collection should be for, say, Dewey decimal number 730, plastic arts?
When at first you don't succeed, reevaluate. With or without an assessment tool, two essential facts remain: Our collection is significantly outdated, and our collection budget figures at one-third to one-half that of comparable libraries. Needless to say, a new goal for addressing the problem will appear on my list for 2008.
6. Establish strong public communications policies and procedures. January's water bill included a redesign of the newsletter that I can live with. Next up: the City Web site.
7. Create a mission statement for Economic Development. Done. See post here.
8. Install and repair sidewalks in the Shelley School Area. See post, here. This is still under design. The wheels of government, especially federal government, turn much too slowly for my liking.
9. Finally finish the parks bond by installing curb and gutter at Art Dye. This is still not finished, and I'm fit to be tied. Why such delays, you ask? The short answer is: Red tape. This one goes back on the list for 2008.
10. Do all the above with no tax increases. Yes, we made it through 2007 with no tax increases. I dislike paying my taxes as much as anybody -- but we're not likely to make more progress on arts, parks, or the library without raising dedicated revenues for these causes. This is why the Council is considering asking the voters in 2008 for a RAP tax or a library tax. Or some combination of both. For further information, read Caleb Warnock's article in Friday's Daily Herald.
posted by Heidi Rodeback at 5:52 PM
2 Comments:
I read the article in the Herald about the possible RAP tax and property tax increase for the library and I'd like to get your side of the story. First, the article made it appear that the increased taxes wouldn't necessarily increase funding to parks or the library but would rather make more general fund money available for other projects. Is this true?
Second, Although a north county library system would increase the number of items checked out at the AF library, wouldn't it also bring in more revenue? Wouldn't it be wise to wait on a tax increase for the library until we see what that increased revenue amounts to? I agree that the library's holdings are woefully inadequate, its just hard to swallow another increase in property taxes. The city increased property taxes by approximately 50% in 2006, and the proposed tax increase of $12 per month on a $170,000 home would be nearly another 50% increase if I've figured correctly. That means my property taxes would have doubled in two years (2006-2008). Add to that the frustration from those whose property taxes increased in 2007 as a result of the county valuation and the property tax increases from the school district during that same time and you are talking a serious impact.
Let me take your questions in order.
Would the revenue be used to increase funding to parks, arts, or library services, or would the City use the revenue to free up other revenue for other general fund use?
In Thursday's discussion, both sides of the question were advocated by different parties. On the one hand, the City doesn't have enough money to build the roads it needs or to maintain the roads it has. Using a new revenue source to free up funds for core services is tempting. On the other hand, I feel it would be misleading to levy a tax in the name of recreation or the library, then send the increase to roads. If that were the intent, then a straight property tax increase would be the right tool, rather than a dedicated library tax or recreation tax.
But the proposals on the table are for increased arts, library, and recreation funding -- largely because of public clamor to house the arts, stock the library, and finish the parks.
Would the reciprocal borrowing agreement bring in more revenue?
No. It could bring in some additional revenue, but not a significant amount. This agreement would allow AF patrons to use libraries in other north county cities and vice versa, but it would not charge residents extra for the convenience.
For the record, however, let me explain that our library is only free to American Fork taxpayers. Residents of Highland, Alpine and Cedar Hills who use our library pay a $70 annual fee. If those residents wish to participate in the reciprocal borrowing agreement, they will still need to pay that fee to their "home" library, which is AF. Residents of Saratoga Springs will pay their non-resident fee to the Lehi library, and so on.
Is the City Council seriously considering another 50 percent increase to property taxes?
No. Nobody has the stomach for this. This is why we elect fellow taxpayers to office, so we don't get robbed quite so often by our government.
When the library board put forward the proposal for additional collection funding, their preliminary inquiries suggested a yield of $100,000 from this tax, not $1.2 million. When I heard that figure in Thursday's meeting, my jaw dropped to the ground. Another 50 percent increase is not what anybody had in mind, and I expect that number will be taken off the table pretty soon.
Post a Comment
<< Home