My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
June 25, 1979
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
1979
>
June 25, 1979
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2004 2:50:22 PM
Creation date
11/22/2004 3:02:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
6/25/1979
SESSIONNUM
1223
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Session 1223, Minutes <br />June 25, 1979 <br /> <br />Page 14 <br /> <br />There was discussion about which of the bills introduced last week were to be <br />voted on. City Clerk Poscover said there would be a second and third reading of <br />those ordinances which are to be passed. With respect to the others, the Rules and <br />Regulations of the Council provide that upon announcement of the second reading of <br />any bill, if there are objections to it, the question shall be put by the Chairman <br />"Shall the proposal be rejected?" If a majority of the Council vote in favor of re- <br />jection, the bill shall be defeated. <br /> <br />Mayor Mooney asked the Council if Bill Nos. 7363, 7354, 7365, 7366, 7367 and 7368 <br />should be rejected. Ail voted Aye except Councilmen Kelley and Lieberman. <br /> <br />Discussion moved to setting the tax for the library. Councilman Kelley spoke in <br />favor of a 35¢ rate, rather than the requested 40¢ rate. He so moved. Councilman <br />Metcalfe said she felt that the Library would be happy with that, as long as they <br />have the assurance that money from the city would be available to tide them over the <br />beginning of their fiscal year until tax monies were available to them. Mrs. Met- <br />calfe seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Mayor Mooney then asked the Council if Bill Nos. 7342, 7346 and 7348 should be re- <br />Jected. Ail voted Ayeo <br /> <br />Council now embarked on a discussion of the property tax in conjunction with the tax <br />on utilities. Councilman Kelley spoke in favor of maintaining the property tax at <br />55¢. His reasons are that a higher tax might discourage new construction and might <br />also discourage the passage of a bond issue. Councilman Metcalfe concurred and add- <br />ed that the inequities of the property tax prior to reassessment also fall very un- <br />equally on those parts of the city which have not appreciated in value as much as <br />others. She also said that increasing the property tax and decreasing utility taxes <br />increases the load on non-tax-exempt taxpayers. <br /> <br />Councilman Sabol spoke in favor of keeping the property tax at 55¢, also. <br /> <br />Councilman Lieberman advocated an increase in the property tax by 42¢, to 97¢, to be <br />offset by a decrease in the gross receipts tax on utilities of 2%. Mr. Lieberman <br />said this combination would be of most benefit to the middle income taxpayer. Sen- <br />ior citizens benefit also, since they would be paying less tax on their utility <br />bills. There would be a total saving of $20,000 by the City, the Library and the <br />School District, if the gross receipts tax is reduced by 2%, which is equivalent to <br />2¢ on the tax rate, Mr. Lieberman said. Councilman Glickert concurred with Council- <br />man Lieberman. <br /> <br />Councilman Metcalfe said Council might consider, if they were willing to take a <br />chance on a smaller projected surplus, not trading off an equal amount on the prop- <br />erty tax against the gross receipts tax. That is, lower the gross receipts tax by <br />2% but only raise the property tax by 21¢, or lower the gross receipts tax by 1% and <br />leave the property tax at the current rate, 55¢. She said the revenue predictions <br />which have been made in the recent past have been quite conservative, and she feels <br />it may behoove Council to take this risk. <br /> <br />Councilman Kelley said he thought Councilman Adams and the rest of the Council should <br />consider the possible detrimental effects on the community if the property tax is al- <br />most doubled, as one of the proposals advocates, regardless of what is done as far <br />as the gross receipts tax is concerued. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.