City OKs budget with 24-cent tax hike
The Yuma City Council adopted a city budget of about $211 million Wednesday for the upcoming fiscal year, reducing the increase in the property tax rate from the preliminary budget and not going forward with a proposed 5 percent increase in parks and rec- reation program fees.
A total operating budget of $169.8 million was approved 6-1, with Councilmember Gary Wright voting no. This did not include the capital improvement program and several other line items voted on separately due to a council member declaring a potential conflict of interest.
The budget covers the 2015-16 fiscal year, which begins July 1.
Wright and Councilmember Gary Knight also voted against the adoption of a property tax rate of $2.0704 per $100 assessed valuation, an increase of just over 24 cents over the current rate.
Many council members talked about how difficult it had been to go through the budget to get costs down be- fore taking their final vote on the property tax rate.
Deputy Mayor Edward Thomas said he’d pledged as a candidate four years ago not to raise any taxes or fees when in office, but going through the budget this year from the council perspective had changed some of his views.
“I struggled with this but the reality (is) we were dumped on, $2.7 million by the state (in budget mandates), and that’s just a start. And there are things that we have to pay for, as well as the cost of business has increased,” said Thomas, who is running for reelection in the August city primary.
The council rolled back the tax levy in 2012 and 2013, which Councilmem- ber Leslie McClendon said “probably hurt us. We probably should have gone with the flow.”
She said many of the people she’s spoken to have said, “We love our city, we love our lives, and what are we going to do to maintain that? And sometimes that’s the hard answer, when you work to maintain what you
love, it comes at a cost.”
Wright said he wouldn’t support the budget because he didn’t think enough had been done to control costs, particularly with personnel; the city has about 1,200 employees, 952 of which are full-time.
“I heard so many comments out there as far as administration, do we need certain positions. I looked at all positions and I felt we could have done more on consolidations of positions,” he said.
Knight voted for the budget but felt the council could get by with a property tax rate increase of about 5 cents, because the city historically hasn’t spent all the money set aside in its general fund, where property and sales tax goes.
“At the end of the year we have money left over but guess what, the taxpayers end up paying higher taxes, just so we can have money left over. We’re proposed to have $3 million left over at the end of this year. I don’t agree with that,” he said.
Councilmember Cody Beeson said cutting the costs too close could land the city in the red, and most other entities leave the same sort of “cushion” in their budgets.
“None of us want to raise taxes, but we have an obligation to make sure we keep the city running,” he said.
Rumors of deep cuts to or elimination of youth sports programs helped draw about 200 people to the council meeting though the bulk left after the public hearing was over.
Most of the nearly 20 residents who spoke at the public hearing talked about the importance of soccer, football, baseball, basketball, swimming and other sports to local kids in leagues which play on cityowned fields.
“I myself have 850-plus kids in my program, so when the rumors went out I was very concerned,” said Charlie Castaneda, president of Yuma Catch & Go Flag Football. “I want to give parks and recreation props. They go far and beyond their call of duties and help make our program what it is today.”
Some speakers representing large youth sports programs said they didn’t think the 5 percent fee increase brought up in previous council budget meetings would do much damage to their programs, but other speakers were concerned about it.
Mary Ann Easterday said, “Last night it was brought up that our prices haven’t gone up for a long time, and that’s true. But we ought to be proud that our prices are not going up. And myself and others have voted that 2 percent sales tax increase for our children, and that’s what it was meant to be for, for the recreation, for the visitors bureau and the Heritage Center,” she said.
One of the few speakers who didn’t address the parks issue was Robert Ingold, manager and co-owner of a 300,000 square-foot industrial park in Yuma.
He said a continued soft economy in the area is being further hurt by higher taxes. “I haven’t raised the rent in five years, because I can’t. The only new tenants I’ve got are with the U.S. government. I’ve got no new industrial tenants in five years.”
He also criticized the council and city administration for not being better prepared for the effect of state budget mandates.
“People talk about the government passing the costs down to cities and counties. You guys knew it was coming here. You knew it was coming! And you never did nothing about it. Now it’s a shock that the state is passing costs down to you. It’s a surprise?”
Wilkinson responded that the magnitude of the new state-driven costs is higher than expected, particularly the $2.2 million increase in the mandated payment to the state’s public safety retirement system.
Tuesday night’s cuts to the budget by the council included $400,000 in police department costs shifted away from the general fund, $300,000 expected to be saved by a 3-month delay in filling open positions, and a $32,000 cut in travel budgets.
Nearly $218,000 was transferred from the general fund reserve fund of about $13 million. Two additional expenditures were also approved: $37,000 to help pay the salary of a binational coordinator for the Greater Yuma Economic Development Corporation and $7,000 toward Yuma County’s Mental Health Court program.
The preliminary budget approved by the council June 3 was the one presented by city staff which set the maximum property tax rate allowed under state law of $2.2440, a 41-cent increase over this year’s.
The City Council found itself under added scrutiny while going over the budget this month because their decisions came on the heels of other taxing districts considering or adopting higher property tax rates.
Yuma County’s Board of Supervisors approved a 31-cent increase to its tax rate within its final budget Monday. Arizona Western College’s governing board is looking at a proposed 16-cent increase to $2.16, or four cents above what it would be if the underlying tax levy were to remain at the same dollar amount.
Yuma Elementary School District 1’s proposed budget includes an 18-cent increase to $2.5379. Crane Elementary School District’s preliminary budget puts the estimated property tax rate for the district 10 cents higher than this year. Meanwhile, Yuma Union High School District is slated to have a property tax rate decrease of nearly 14 cents, to $2.6157.