City Council - Mayor

[Immis]

Originally Posted by brete

If you told me in January I'd be supporting the Mayor, Chris Jones and Connelly, I'd told you to quit huffing paint. Craziest election I've ever seen.

I can totally relate

[semi-native]

Originally Posted by brete

Sales Tax is supposed to be the primary source of revenue for Texas cities. That's the way the legislature has set them up. The whole point in allowing cities to levy sales tax was to reduce the cities dependence on property taxes. Saying cities are too reliant on sales tax is like saying animals are too dependent on Oxygen

Not quite. In the event of a downturn in the retail sector or a bigger, better outlet mall, or a bigger move to online shopping, etc, we could find ourselves in a tough spot.

More real jobs and more property owners would mean more *potential* property tax, in the event of a downturn and more diversity for the local economy. It could also mean lower tax rates for everyone now, as long as the Outlet Mall keeps chugging along.

Using sales tax and *relying* on it are not necessarily the same thing. If the sales tax money started to dry up, we'd be SOL. There just isn'a a whole lot of room for raising our property taxes to offset a shortfall. It would be nice to have a fallback position and it would be nice to have some real jobs in San Marcos for a change.

[MesquiteMan]

Originally Posted by brete

If you told me in January I'd be supporting the Mayor, Chris Jones and Connelly, I'd told you to quit huffing paint. Craziest election I've ever seen.

If you told me in January that you would be supporting the Mayor, Chris Jones, and Connelly, I would have commended you for being a smart man and caring about the future prosperity of San Marcos!!!

[brete]

Local Government 101.

Counties and School Districts are primarily funded through property taxes.

Cities and transportation districts are primarily funded through sales tax. Cities can levy property taxes, but the sales tax is intended to be the primary funding source. Now what Newman and semi-native may mean is we are too reliant on a single source for a large chunk of our sales tax base.

Mesquite Man, the fact I am supporting those three is more a reflection of the lack of quality opposition than an actual endorsement. Connelly especially. The use of revenue bonds (which weren't designed to be used for anything permenant) to circumvent the will of the voters and the state constitution is a big no no in my book.

[swisher]

Originally Posted by MesquiteMan

If you told me in January that you would be supporting the Mayor, Chris Jones, and Connelly, I would have commended you for being a smart man and caring about the future prosperity of San Marcos!!!

Ugggh. Future prosperity of SM or of Terry Gilmore and other big campaign donors?

[swisher]

[QUOTE=brete;6442]Local Government 101.

Counties and School Districts are primarily funded through property taxes.[QUOTE]


I agree Brete. Our ratio of income from one source may be higher and our total percentage is probably higher, but would we rather have less sales tax income? No. Diversify with better jobs, yes and stop offering tax incentives to companies who pay $12-15/hr. and retail.

[zoom]

Originally Posted by swisher

Ugggh. Future prosperity of SM or of Terry Gilmore and other big campaign donors?

exactly my thoughts.

mayor and current council haven't brought any good jobs here. all i've seen in gilmore/carson getting their land increased and low paying jobs. roads getting repaved that don't even need it.

the jobs the mayor brags about are jobs that were already here. she offered a tax break to kulabyte to build a building, they would have stayed no matter.

experience running a city? i don't know what experience susan had. she ran a day labor company and was a high school drop out. is that what it takes to be mayor?

not sure whom i am voting for yet. debates will tell me that. maybe dave is an amateur but i haven't seen much progress during susan's 4 years.

[semi-native]

Originally Posted by brete

Now what Newman and semi-native may mean is we are too reliant on a single source for a large chunk of our sales tax base.

That's not quite what I am saying, but it is not an important enough issue (to me) to warrant a long, drawn out discussion.

Suffice it to say that the city's obsession with retail and failure to attract other jobs, protect neighborhoods and property values, and attract more homeowners doesn't sit well with me, for many, many reasons.

I would point out that within our proposed 2009 budget it says:

Consistent retail sales have kept this revenue stream steady for the past several years. It is important to note that sales tax revenues are a volatile funding source and are subject to shifts in local, state and national economies. Our reliance on this revenue source is approached with caution.

48% of our proposed 2009 budget comes from sales tax. In Austin, it is 26%.

Call me crazy, but 26% feels better to me. The retail sector can be scary and the rising cost of oil can easily put a damper on plans to travel to the Outlet Malls from all over creation, even if the retail sector is doing fine.

This is not to say I want less sales tax. I want more income from other sources to balance it out. It's not like all that extra sales tax is gravy, we don't have enough money to get everything done as it stands now. If the sales tax numbers drop (and eventually, they will), we're in trouble.

[real jupiter]

Funny in a twisted sort of way, ran unopposed spent $30,000.00 on her campaign!!! Does not add up but with only a GED, its expected.

[real jupiter]

:smile: semi, through what lens of economic philosophy do you view the world?