My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2016 06 07 SP
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2016 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2016 06 07 SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:39 PM
Creation date
7/6/2016 3:33:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2016 06 07 SP
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
City Council <br />Special Meeting Minutes <br />June 7, 2016 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />Urban stated there was a fairly equal response for those who supported a property tax <br />for the operations and maintenance (O &M) or a sales tax, with support for a sales tax <br />being just slightly higher. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated she would like staff to bring back ballot language for <br />a property tax for the construction bond and a sales tax for the O &M. Councilmember <br />Loo agreed and added that businesses would prefer the sales tax to the property tax <br />because businesses pay such a higher rate for property tax. <br />Resident Michael Menaker noted the survey shows how high incomes are in Louisville <br />and that many people have the ability to pay for most anything they want He added <br />more respondents were older and older voters were less likely to vote yes. In the end, <br />he felt these responses show what people know in the absence of any real education of <br />what the expansion would offer, meaning that what will be needed is the right education <br />campaign. <br />Councilmember Keany agreed with the direction to staff to prepare ballot language for a <br />property tax for expansion and a sales tax for the O &M. Maloney agreed with that <br />approach. <br />Mayor Muckle noted he likes a property tax option for both so as to diversify the City's <br />revenue sources and not be so dependent on sales tax if there is a downturn in sales <br />tax. <br />Councilmember Loo agreed with the reasoning but noted there is also a lot of <br />discussion that sales tax makes those who don't live here pay their fair share rather <br />than putting all the burden on residents. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann would like to see how much the fees would need to be <br />raised so as not to have an additional tax for O &M. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton noted new property taxes will always generate push back from <br />seniors and businesses. He thinks the property tax route for O &M may be a harder sell. <br />He supported a sales tax for O &M. Councilmember Maloney agreed stating the effect of <br />property tax increases is much greater for businesses. <br />Councilmember Loo noted businesses generally pass costs on to tenants and we <br />already have a very high lease rate. If lease rates increase again that impacts our <br />competitiveness in attracting businesses. <br />Councilmember Leh stated the City can't be cavalier about how these taxes affect the <br />business community. He agreed on the property and sales tax combination. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton noted he supports the 25 -year bond maturity period or possibly <br />even 30 years. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.