| Author | Post |
|---|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27th, 2008 01:34 am |
|
Bravo wrote:
Again, I ask;
How has the TOQC disenfranchised you?
Bravo,
This comment is born of an old wound. Until the City of San Tan tried to assimilate the Foothills we long time residents were very close allys to Queen Creek. Many of us invested heavily in the community, most by volunteerism. Several years running, the volunteer of the year for the Town of Queen Creek was from the Foothills.
We requested that the Town annex us to save us from an incorporation attempt we viewed as unviable . The Town declined. Feelings were hurt. Mine included. I hold no animosity toward Queen Creek but after 16 years of consecutive residency and consistent contribution to the Town, it hurts when someone tells me that I should look to Florence for leadership.
I have no vote but I am forever a Queen Creek resident. I apologize for allowing my personal feelings to cloud my judgement when responding to your comment. I know it's just water under the bridge.
Regards,
Anne
|
Bravo
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 09:56 pm |
|
Anne Reed wrote:
No excuse at all... Last time I checked my mailing address I live in Queen Creek as do the 46,000 other residents who Queen Creek has disenfranchised.
GK wrote:
I hate that term, I always get the picture of some whiney progressive liberal that blames everyone for everything!
And I , still don't have my answer -Bravo
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 2110 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 09:49 pm |
|
disenfranchised
I hate that term, I always get the picture of some whiney progressive liberal that blames everyone for everything!
No "disenfranchisement here"
|
Bravo
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 09:33 pm |
|
Again, I ask;
How has the TOQC disenfranchised you?
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 09:29 pm |
|
So now it is the sales rep’s fault. Just another excuse that I’m tired of hearing. I must agree that my address also says Queen Creek.
|
Bravo
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 08:54 pm |
|
Anne wrote;
No excuse at all... Last time I checked my mailing address I live in Queen Creek as do the 46,000 other residents who Queen Creek has disenfranchised
How has the TOQC disenfranchised you? I feel the developers that did not disclose properly to new residents that they were not in the Town limits are the ones' that are to blame for anyone being disenfranchised. I went and looked at many a model home in the JR area when they were first going up. I purposely asked the question if I was in the TOQC and was continually lied to by every sales rep.
Florence at one time was willing to annex your area. Queen creek is not. If, your residents want to be a city what is the problem with going with Florence. If, they were to change my address today to Gilbert or Mesa, I would care less.
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 08:22 pm |
|
Bravo wrote:
How come your not asking Florence, where your government officials are seated, to annex the Hunt Area??
Don't give me the weak excuse that Queen Creek is a few miles closer!
No excuse at all... Last time I checked my mailing address I live in Queen Creek as do the 46,000 other residents who Queen Creek has disenfranchised. We didn't move to Florence, we moved to Queen Creek. That simple.
We're told that if we were annexed we dilute the real voters. We may not be able to vote but we live in Queen Creek until further notice, like it, or not.
Regards,
AnneLast edited on Sat Jul 26th, 2008 08:24 pm by anne.reed
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 07:55 pm |
|
History_101 wrote:
Wasn’t looking or asking for an apology, was just trying to set the record straight. I was actually speaking nearly exclusively of homes/residents. Without homes setting on lots, you don’t have population and without population you don’t get many of those funds from the state. Your point would be more valid if we were all large lot homes’ setting on several acres of land, but that isn’t the case. In the developments our roads are paved, we have water and sewer and about all you’d have to provide for is police and fire protection. I’m quite sure any town/city would love to annex 5 acres of commercial to 1 acre of residential; however, we both know that isn’t always the case. As posted, that could refer to be cherry picking and I believe that is exactly what Queen Creek is doing. Queen Creek could have annexed this area years ago before all of the building took place and then they could have recognized the lost revenue you speak of. That is water under the bridge and I’m tired of hearing that as an excuse. We are here now and Queen Creek has to put up with us because we aren’t going anywhere. We drive through your town several times a day and you don’t see one red cent from us unless we stop and purchase something. Now why would we do that when we are considered to be outsiders and unwanted? Are we so different then those that reside with Queen Creek proper? I wake up every morning, put my pants on one leg at a time and probably do many of the same things when getting ready for work that those that reside within Queen Creek does. Does that make me a majority or someone else a minority? I think not. My recollection tells me that the new shopping centers in Queen Creek were not all that well received either, but they came in. We are not looking for a handout nor do we think we are special. We just want to be a part of the community. Now if Queen Creek can’t afford us, then how could we afford ourselves in a new city starting up from scratch with nothing to begin with?
Points well taken, History.
Florence was courting the subdivisions as it has extended it's planning area along school district lines, west to Gary and north to Combs (last I heard). They want the commercial access to SR802 and are willing to provide services to residents for that privilege.
Last time I heard, JR residents were not interested in being annexed by Florence who is very unlikely to divest itself of it's planning area for reasons stated above, which makes incorporation of a viable city or town near non-existent.
This is an issue where GSTAC can bring in some speakers from the various municipalities, counties, entities and agencies that will give people the information they will need to make an informed choice about their future self governance (or lack thereof).
Regards,
Anne
|
Bravo
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 07:54 pm |
|
How come your not asking Florence, where your government officials are seated, to annex the Hunt Area??
Don't give me the weak excuse that Queen Creek is a few miles closer!
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 07:39 pm |
|
Wasn’t looking or asking for an apology, was just trying to set the record straight. I was actually speaking nearly exclusively of homes/residents. Without homes setting on lots, you don’t have population and without population you don’t get many of those funds from the state. Your point would be more valid if we were all large lot homes’ setting on several acres of land, but that isn’t the case. In the developments our roads are paved, we have water and sewer and about all you’d have to provide for is police and fire protection. I’m quite sure any town/city would love to annex 5 acres of commercial to 1 acre of residential; however, we both know that isn’t always the case. As posted, that could refer to be cherry picking and I believe that is exactly what Queen Creek is doing. Queen Creek could have annexed this area years ago before all of the building took place and then they could have recognized the lost revenue you speak of. That is water under the bridge and I’m tired of hearing that as an excuse. We are here now and Queen Creek has to put up with us because we aren’t going anywhere. We drive through your town several times a day and you don’t see one red cent from us unless we stop and purchase something. Now why would we do that when we are considered to be outsiders and unwanted? Are we so different then those that reside with Queen Creek proper? I wake up every morning, put my pants on one leg at a time and probably do many of the same things when getting ready for work that those that reside within Queen Creek does. Does that make me a majority or someone else a minority? I think not. My recollection tells me that the new shopping centers in Queen Creek were not all that well received either, but they came in. We are not looking for a handout nor do we think we are special. We just want to be a part of the community. Now if Queen Creek can’t afford us, then how could we afford ourselves in a new city starting up from scratch with nothing to begin with?
|
nybrian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 05:13 pm |
|
Why would QC want to take on the Hunt corridor? They already get the benefit of us spending money in their town, they can continue annexing commercial (Hospital, the planned shopping centers at that intersection) for additional revenue. As a STH resident I would love to be annexed, but it's not going to happen. Why take on the headache that our area is and will continue to be? Cherrypick the commercial, and some of the high end residential so as to remain contiguous, and leave the subdivisions to fend for themselves. The only benefit of annexing residential is that it allows the city to touch, and annex, commercial.
So if we don't do anything, that is our future. If we can act, we can include the commercial before it is annexed and have a base from which to fund the city expenses.
|
QCVillager
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 03:43 pm |
|
History_101 wrote: QCVillager wrote: Pipeman, rooftops do NOT provide revenues. Unless you are a super wealthy community with super high property values and super high property taxes.
You see, homes actually cost more in services than they provide in revenues.
First, Pipeman did not make that statement, I did. my mistake and my apologies.
Somehow Councilman, with all due respect, you lost me here. You state roof tops doesn’t bring money into a city/town. thanks for catching that, because it isn't exactly what i meant. allow me to clarify... firstly, my assumption when you talk about annexing "rooftops" was that you were speaking nearly exclusively of homes/residences, not businesses. i thought that to be a fairly safe assumption since you made mention of the 45,000 population and typically that means homes. i should have been more clear and should not have said that homes don't provide revenues... indeed they do as per your below. HOWEVER... the BOTTOM LINE... even after factoring in all the positives as you have noted below, the Net of it is that annexation of EXISTING rooftops nearly without exception costs MORE in expenditures for a community than they bring in in revenues. now, the situation becomes entirely reversed if say the area of annexation has say 5 acres of employment or retail for every 1 acre of residential rooftops. Let me list a few ways in which they do. Now please let me make one assumption, the roof tops have residents and are not setting vacant.
1. Urban Revenue Sharing. The state is required to maintain an urban revenue sharing fund, consisting of a percentage of the net proceeds of the state income tax, to be distributed directly to cities and towns. The funds are distributed each month based on the individual municipality's population in relation to the total incorporated population of the state.
2. State Sales Tax. Incorporated cities and towns in the state are entitled to receive a portion of the state sales tax collections. The distribution of these funds is based strictly on the population of the incorporated city or town as a percentage of the total population of all incorporated cities and towns in the state.
3. Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF). Cities and towns are also entitled to receive a portion of the highway user revenues collected by the state. The highway user revenues consist of the gasoline and diesel fuel taxes as well as other transportation related fees. This money is distributed on a two-part formula. One half of the money is distributed on the basis of the population of an incorporated city or town as a percentage of the total of all incorporated cities and towns in the county in which the municipality is located and the population of each city and town in the county. Highway user revenue funds may only be used for street and highway purposes.
4. Vehicle License Tax (VLT). Cities and towns are entitled to receive a share of the money collected from tax payments for the registration of motor vehicles. The vehicle license tax is a state tax returned through the counties to the incorporated municipalities within each county. (A percentage of the total revenue from this source is also deposited in the highway user revenue fund and the state highway fund.) These revenues are distributed on the basis of the population of a city or town in relation to the total incorporated population of the county.
5. Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF). This state shared revenue is generated by the state lottery. Distribution is based upon the population of the city or town in relation to the total population of all cities and towns. Each city and town is entitled to receive a minimum of $10,000.
On top of all this, the town would benefit from Sales Tax (Transaction Privilege Tax) from the businesses that are in the annexed area, Property Tax Queen Creek does have a property tax don’t they, Business and Occupational License Taxes, Utility Franchise Taxes, Development Fees, Fines and Forfeitures and Municipal Utility Operations.
What a windfall. sure looks like it. but that is like saying my payroll check is a windfall but neglecting to mention that a bunch of it has to go to the mortgage, some of it to food purchases, etc... what looks like a boatload (in my case a dinghy) of money doesn't go so far after you factor in all the expenditures . Now if homes do cost the town more money then they bring in, how does the town remain solvent? remember, we are talking here of standing/already built homes. in TOQC, we would have collected thousands of dollars in Impact Fees with the home permits pulled. those monies go to buying park lands, buying land for firehouses and public works yards, vehicles, buildings, etc.. etc.. annexing existing homes doesn't allow for that or for the construction sales tax. so you don't get a bunch of the upfront offsetting monies, but you have the demand for services effective day 1 of the annexaction. by the way, we haven't yet talked about density here either. density or more accurately, density/land use plays a huge roll in the equation. (i'll owe you a chart here, but have to find it.) If this is the case, why would anyone want to incorporate? local planning, local control. and the eventual catching up of all the services/needs/ammenities. in my response, i was not talking about incorporating an area, but instead was talking strictly about an already incorporated area (TOQC) annexing a lot of already built residential rooftops. We both know towns/cities are a business and no one goes into business to loose money. The money has to come from somewhere.
TOQC incorporated early (relative to size of geography and population) and was able to plan for the future with respect to where all the services and ammenities would go. we didn't do the same planning for the whole of the Hunt corridor or for areas not within our planning area. with the slow down in home building we are like any other local gov't entity and have had to make substantial budgetary cuts. we had a reliance on construction sales tax and are working to the diversification of revenue streams that i mentioned. with any annexation... you take a look at the area in question as a whole and do the cost-benefit analysis. that is where you factor in how much services to the residents will cost, how much in property and retail sales taxes would be collected, where you factor in all the 5 items you posted, you factor in any special needs/considerations, natural resources, a myriad of factors. that will show whether it is a net positive or net negative.
so those are all the fiscal considerations. of course, if an annexation were to show a net positive, it would be more likely to have support. however, it wouldn't guarantee support. that is where we come back to the political aspect of it. speaking directly of the Hunt Hwy corridor... say down to and including JR. lets assume for the moment that after a cost-benefit analysis that the numbers showed a slight net positive fiscally... do you think that the people of TOQC would be supportive of making themselves a minority status where they would be outnumbered 2:1 or 3:1 ? i am doubtful. even with our changing demographic, there is a sentiment of wanting to stay smaller, a bit more rural, have more of a small town feel. it is already going to be tough to maintain that with our projected build-out population of 93,000. can you imagine the backlash if someone were to seriously toss out the trial balloon that said we were considering annexing to a build-out population of say 3 or 4 times that many people ? to understate it... i don't think that would be well received. Last edited on Sat Jul 26th, 2008 03:49 pm by QCVillager
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 02:58 pm |
|
2 cents wrote: The reply to this should be interesting! Good info H.
2
I would like to know if all that pool of money ONLY goes to towns/cities, or does a percentage also go to unincorporated counties to disburse as they see fit?
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 208 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 02:25 pm |
|
The reply to this should be interesting! Good info H.
2
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 01:50 pm |
|
QCVillager wrote: Pipeman, rooftops do NOT provide revenues. Unless you are a super wealthy community with super high property values and super high property taxes.
You see, homes actually cost more in services than they provide in revenues.
First, Pipeman did not make that statement, I did. Somehow Councilman, with all due respect, you lost me here. You state roof tops doesn’t bring money into a city/town. Let me list a few ways in which they do. Now please let me make one assumption, the roof tops have residents and are not setting vacant.
1. Urban Revenue Sharing. The state is required to maintain an urban revenue sharing fund, consisting of a percentage of the net proceeds of the state income tax, to be distributed directly to cities and towns. The funds are distributed each month based on the individual municipality's population in relation to the total incorporated population of the state.
2. State Sales Tax. Incorporated cities and towns in the state are entitled to receive a portion of the state sales tax collections. The distribution of these funds is based strictly on the population of the incorporated city or town as a percentage of the total population of all incorporated cities and towns in the state.
3. Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF). Cities and towns are also entitled to receive a portion of the highway user revenues collected by the state. The highway user revenues consist of the gasoline and diesel fuel taxes as well as other transportation related fees. This money is distributed on a two-part formula. One half of the money is distributed on the basis of the population of an incorporated city or town as a percentage of the total of all incorporated cities and towns in the county in which the municipality is located and the population of each city and town in the county. Highway user revenue funds may only be used for street and highway purposes.
4. Vehicle License Tax (VLT). Cities and towns are entitled to receive a share of the money collected from tax payments for the registration of motor vehicles. The vehicle license tax is a state tax returned through the counties to the incorporated municipalities within each county. (A percentage of the total revenue from this source is also deposited in the highway user revenue fund and the state highway fund.) These revenues are distributed on the basis of the population of a city or town in relation to the total incorporated population of the county.
5. Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF). This state shared revenue is generated by the state lottery. Distribution is based upon the population of the city or town in relation to the total population of all cities and towns. Each city and town is entitled to receive a minimum of $10,000.
On top of all this, the town would benefit from Sales Tax (Transaction Privilege Tax) from the businesses that are in the annexed area, Property Tax Queen Creek does have a property tax don’t they, Business and Occupational License Taxes, Utility Franchise Taxes, Development Fees, Fines and Forfeitures and Municipal Utility Operations.
What a windfall. Now if homes do cost the town more money then they bring in, how does the town remain solvent? If this is the case, why would anyone want to incorporate? We both know towns/cities are a business and no one goes into business to loose money. The money has to come from somewhere.
|
QCVillager
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 01:16 am |
|
Pipeman wrote: (black italics)
Politics is power. Those with the power provide direction. Now if Queen Creek, a town of lets say of 20,000 only because I don’t have the exact number at my finger tips, annexes the Hunt Corridor with a population of lets say of 45,000, where do you think the power base would be? The power would immediately shift to the Hunt Corridor and those residents could immediately change the direction of Queen Creek by putting their own men/women in the office of Mayor or City Council. Those that have been in the Queen Creek power circles for years don’t want to see this happen but as I said earlier, times are changing for Queen Creek.
very true i am sure, but i would venture a guess that it isn't so much the few people in office that would have the biggest problem with it... i think the TOQC residents themselves would have the biggest problem with it and would be most vehemently opposed.
i have said in the past that there is NO WAY you could get the voters in this Town to vote themselves out of power in essence. even as our demographic has changed and will continue to do so, there is no way you could get 24,000 people to vote themselves into minority status.
There will be a day when they need the revenues from the roof tops that sit along the Hunt Corridor.
Pipeman, rooftops do NOT provide revenues. unless you are a super wealthy community with super high property values and super high property taxes.
you see, homes actually cost more in services than they provide in revenues.
each home requires park land, fire and police protection, staff and public works depts., all sorts of things that cost money. and you can only tax the average homeowner so much. most places cannot be "bedroom communities" - again... unless they are super wealthy and the rich homeowners don't mind paying really high property taxes.
TOQC has certain minimum "LOS" or levels of service for things... x number of acres of parks per thousand residents, x number of town vehicles per thousand residents, etc... we also have 3 sided architecture requirements and the area along hunt hwy simply wasn't planned with all of those things in mind. we have a five park masterplan for our buildout population. we have identified all of our Town facilities as far as fire houses and eventual police dept bldg, courts, just to name a few... for TOQC to annex rooftops would mean finding a way to retro-fit all of that into the annexation area.
literally the bottom line is that residences/rooftops are a net DRAIN of revenues and cost more than they bring in. this is why TOQC has an economic development commission and are identifying ways to attract employers and business into our community. note i am not just talking retail since those won't cut it either. they are simply another leg of the stool. we are looking for ways to diversify and get off the reliance on construction sales tax and luckily we have had some success with new retailers coming online and so that is the interim... but we cannot get ourselves in a position where we are overly reliant on that either. we need a balanced approach. taking on more rooftops tips that balance.
That day may come sooner then you think.
it really won't. it simply isn't fiscally sound. and it will never fly politically.
sorry i didn't see this earlier Pipeman.
Last edited on Sat Jul 26th, 2008 01:18 am by QCVillager
|
anne.reed
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 12:21 am |
|
Thanks to 2 cents for this link:
Incorporation and Annexation:
The Usual Ways to Deal with Urban Growth
http://www.asu.edu/copp/morrison/SVISTAS.pdf
In Arizona, a community of at least 1,500 residents in an unin-
corporated area may become a municipality by means of
incorporation. This can occur in two ways: either organizers
obtain signatures from at least two-thirds of the qualified
voters in the community who approve of the incorporation, or
organizers gather signatures from at least 10% of qualified
voters in the community, hold an election, and have a majority
of voters approve.
First, however, the proposed municipality must qualify as a
“community.” Arizona law defines that as a “locality in which
a body of people resides in more or less proximity having
common interests in such services as public health,
public protection, fire protection, and water which bind
together the people of the area, and where the people
are acquainted and mingle in business, social, educational,
and recreational activities.”
The communitymust also be “urban in nature,” which means
that it “not include large areas of uninhabited, rural, or
farm lands.” State law gives countyboards of supervisors
the task of determining whether an area is a community and
urban in nature.
Since the early1960s, state law has discouraged communities
from incorporating close to existing municipalities by
requiring permission from those municipalities. The
hopeful community can request permission directly
to incorporate from a city or town, or it can formally ask to
be annexed by a neighboring city or town, and if this request
is not granted within 120 days, the community is considered
to have met the state’s permission requirements.
In practice, the incorporation process can be a long one. One
example is Fountain Hills, Arizona. The town developed in the
late 1960s on some 11,000 acres once belonging to a large cattle
ranch, but did not incorporate until 1989. Organizers first had to
get the permission of neighboring Mesa and Scottsdale, a task
that required considerable bargaining on specific boundaries.
Then it took three elections to secure voter approval from com-
munity voters. Part of the problem organizers faced was opposition
from a group that favored annexation with Scottsdale.
Considering legal conditions and past practices in Arizona,
some parts of Superstition Vistas are likely to be annexed
into existing cities and towns. Arizona municipalities in the
past have been aggressive about annexation because
they viewed territorial expansion asessential to their well
being. The annexation process gives them more control over
developments on their boundaries and it allows them to
capture increased revenues from sales taxes generated by
retail businesses. Increasing their population size also
helps revenues because Arizona municipalities receive
state aid based on population formulas. City and town
officials, however, are often selective about the areas
they target for annexation, passing up opportunities where
the anticipated revenues do not exceed the cost of pro-
vidingmore services.
Given the size of Superstition Vistas, considerable room
is available for existing municipalities to expand, new cities
to be created, and some unincorporated areas to remain as
potential spawning grounds for new communities.
Source: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Arizona State University 2005.
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 2110 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 09:01 pm |
|
| GREAT AVATAR!!
|
nilbog
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 285 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 08:46 pm |
|
There is a lot of good information in this document that History_101 linked to, but the most interesting tidbit relating to us and our future when it comes to Florence is in the chapter "Growth Areas Element" on page 168.
Note that all of us in the San Tan area (except San Tan Heights and the foothills) live in what Florence is calling Area C - Northwest Growth Area. This is what they have to say about us:
Area C – Northwest Growth Area
The Northwest Growth Area encompasses the entire region north of Heritage Road in the expanded Town planning area. While there is a great deal of existing development along Hunt Highway, the area as a whole is still largely undeveloped and has the potential to accommodate many thousands of new residents. According to the land use plan, the area is primarily low to medium residential with commercial corners and some employment uses along the railroad. The Northwest Growth Area has not yet been incorporated into Florence.
Opportunities: This area is closest in proximity to Maricopa County, and was one of the first parts of Pinal County to experience the substantial housing boom that began in 2004. Like many parts of the metro area, new housing development has been significantly curtailed in 2008. Nonetheless, this growth area is well positioned boom again during the next expansion cycle, considering that it now has infrastructure and amenities in place that were non-existent five years ago. As it is closer to the Southeast Valley’s existing job centers than most other parts of Pinal County, it will continue to be a popularlocation for many years.
Existing residents within this area have considerable spending power that, if captured, would be fiscally beneficial to the Town. There is retail planned throughout the region that would capture resident spending, reduce leakage, and contribute to the Town’s sales tax base.
Challenges: Recent development along Hunt Highway has experienced significant infrastructure issues, particularly related to transportation. There are not enough local transportation corridors to efficiently move residents to and from their jobs. This ultimately limits connectivity within Florence as congestion makes it difficult to travel from the northwest portion of the planning area to Merrill Ranch or the Downtown area.
As the Town considers annexing portions of this area, infrastructure and utility needs of existing and future development will need to be addressed. By expanding the municipal boundaries, the Town will take on responsibility and obligations to a greater number of residents and businesses, and the Town will be expected to provide new residents and businesses with levels of service commensurate with the rest of the Town. In keeping with the goals in the Cost of Development Element, it is preferred that new development essentially pay its own way in terms of infrastructure and utilities. The potential for increased property and sales tax collections must be weighed against the costs to provide ongoing services to the region.
There may also be challenges related to integrating this area into Florence while maintaining the Town’s character.
Solutions: The Northwest Growth Area will begin to rapidly expand again when the housing market and economy in Greater Phoenix recovers from the current downturn. The Town will devise and implement an annexation strategy that is fiscally responsible and feasible as a means of gaining control over and coordinating the types of development that occur in this area.
Clearly Florence considers us to be part of it's future...someday. Considering that Page 90 mentions the town built-out potential as being between 588,900 and 761,000 people, and page 121 shows three future municipal parks planned for this area (one near Copper Basin, another near Rittenhouse and Ironwood, and other near the hospital), I would say that chances of them agreeing to any future incorporation effort to be at zero percent.
It would be kinda weird that it would be a long distance phone call across two area codes just to call our own city hall though.
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 2110 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 08:16 pm |
|
Instead of complainig about the county and dreaming about a non existing government, do something that will have real results
UPDATE: Pinal County Manager Terry Doolittle and Planning Director, Jerry Stabley, will actually be presenting the entire program. We have had incredible response thus far so get your reservation in to Heather asap!
Terry Doolittle Introduction:
Terry Doolittle has provided service with Pinal County since 1986. Prior positions include Deputy County Manager, Assistant County Manager for Administrative Services, Finance Director, Principal Internal Auditor, and Internal Auditor. Mr. Doolittle is a graduate of Arizona State University with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Accounting. Previously, Mr. Doolittle was employed by the State of Arizona's Office of the Auditor General (1980-1986). Presently, Mr. Doolittle is a member of the International City/County Managers' Association and the Governmental Finance Officers' Association. Mr. Doolittle served on the Executive Committee for the Arizona City/County Managers' Association and served three terms as Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Arizona County Insurance Pool and the Arizona County Workers' Compensation Pool. Terry and his wife Dodie have five children: Jerry, Solidaire, Monica, Richard, and Travis.
Jerry Stabley Introduction:
Jerry has been with Pinal County for 5 years, and is currently serving as the Planning Director. He is heading up the County’s Comprehensive Plan update.
His staff is responsible for the following work items:
1. Current and Long Range Planning
2. Code Compliance
3. Addressing
4. Minor Land Divisions
His staff is also managing major projects such as:
5. A revision to the Zoning Ordinance
6. Development of the County’s first Open Space Plan
7. Implementing a computerized project tracking system
Prior to working for Pinal County, Jerry spent over 18 years with the City of Scottsdale. While in Scottsdale, Jerry managed the following groups and projects:
· Project Coordination Group
· Downtown Planning
· Waterfront Project
· Scottsdale Visioning
Jerry Holds a Master’s Degree from Arizona State, and a Bachelor’s from Penn State.
Jerry lives in Casa Grande with his wife, Evelyn Casuga and their 14 year old son, Justin.
Come hear the latest on the Pinal Comprehensive Plan. This is a totally new document that Pinal County is considering and it will affect you if you live, work or play in Pinal County. The County is looking for the maximum amount of input so please RSVP to Heather at heather@pinalpartnership.com today!!
Come to the next Pinal Partnership Breakfast!
On Friday August 8th 2008 7:30am Check in
Location: The Property 1251 W Gila Bend Hwy, Casa Grande, AZ 85222 (520) 836-1101
Cost: Members — $15.00 Non-Members — $20.00 we accept cash or check only and you can pay at the door or mail a check (see below)
*Please Mail Checks to:
Tom Smith, Executive Director
4415 S. PRIMROSE DR.
GOLD CANYON, AZ 85218
Checks are Payable to Pinal Partnership
We look forward to seeing you there!
Thank you Platinum Members
Arizona Public Service
ASU Polytechnic
Banner Health
Cardon Hiatt Companies
Central Arizona College
Circle G Development
CMX, LLC
Coe & Van Loo Consultants, Inc
Commerce Realty Advisors
Elliott Pollack
Ensemble Real Estate Services
EPS Group
Evergreen Devco
Gilbert Hospital
Global Water Resources
HDR Engineering
Langley Properties
LeSueur Investments
Pulte Homes Corporation
Rose Law Group, PC
Salt River Project
Walton International Group
Waste Management
Heather Hedelius
Director of Operations and Events
PO Box 904 Florence AZ 85232
Office: (480) 505-3941
Fax: (480) 951-6993
http://www.pinalpartnership.com
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential. It is intended only to be read by the individual or entity named above or their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any distribution of this message, in any form is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at 480.505.3941 or fax 480.951.6993 and delete or destroy any copy of this message. Thank you.
|
nybrian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 04:40 pm |
|
Kind of scary for us San Tan Heights and JR residents. Florence takes everything to the east of Hunt, leaving us in the same spot as unincorporated Gilbert. Rural metro pulls out when Florence comes in, and we get the shaft.
I have no problem being part of Florence or Queen Creek, because as a previous poster said, whenever we are annexed the power flows to where the population lives. What I don't want is to be a small county island with no one representing my interests.
I do believe this effectively ends the thought that we are going to get our own city.
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 208 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 02:20 pm |
|
I don't think I would be holding my breath!
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 01:33 pm |
|
pipeman wrote: I would recommend you remain sitting H, because you are going to get the shock of your life regarding this matter.
OK, the last incorporation attempt was in what, 2004 or 2005? So how much longer do I have to wait until someone gets a big enough set to try it again?
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 540 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 04:16 am |
|
History_101 wrote: Interesting to say the least. I’ve been doing a little light reading this evening and I’d recommend you all take a look at this link. http://tinyurl.com/6jsgbq It takes a bit to load as the file is quite large. It is the 2008 General Plan Update for Florence.
On page 17 you will see a map of their 2008 planning area. It appears this new planning area takes in everything north of the Gila River Indian Community boundary and extends west to Gary Road. On page 115 you get a better idea of the boundaries as road names are given on this map. On page 168, it explains in detail what they think of what they are calling Area “C”.
It sure looks to me like Florence has plans for the Hunt Corridor east of Gary Road. With this being the case, what are the chances of getting them to allow an incorporation effort into a stand alone city?
I would recommend you remain sitting H, because you are going to get the shock of your life regarding this matter.
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 04:10 am |
|
Interesting to say the least. I’ve been doing a little light reading this evening and I’d recommend you all take a look at this link. http://tinyurl.com/6jsgbq It takes a bit to load as the file is quite large. It is the 2008 General Plan Update for Florence.
On page 17 you will see a map of their 2008 planning area. It appears this new planning area takes in everything north of the Gila River Indian Community boundary and extends west to Gary Road. On page 115 you get a better idea of the boundaries as road names are given on this map. On page 168, it explains in detail what they think of what they are calling Area “C”.
It sure looks to me like Florence has plans for the Hunt Corridor east of Gary Road. With this being the case, what are the chances of getting them to allow an incorporation effort into a stand alone city?
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 540 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 04:43 pm |
|
History_101 wrote: Let me first say I’m a die heart conservative, believe government has their fingers in just too much of our lives already and I do believe this area needs some sort of governing structure. I’m just not convinced reinventing the wheel is the correct path.
Having a closed mind and not being willing to change resolves nothing. Only through discussion can one hopefully see another light or gain a different perspective of a situation. I’ve posted articles regarding incorporation in hopes people will read them, learn the process and in doing so be able to make rational decisions.
For you to say “I appreciate the information but your constant negative connotations and sarcastic questions aren’t appreciated” isn’t very political. If you have ambitions to go into politics, you had better toughen up that skin and learn to communicate without throwing barbs at your constituents or you will be on the loosing end of the stick more times then you wish. With statements like that you won’t even win your first election.
Cities require revenue streams to remain solvent. Mesa is approaching build out if they haven’t already and that is one of the reasons they are looking to implement a property tax. They need more revenue. Yes, it must go before the voters and it was voted down. Now what recourse does the city have? They start cutting services. Queen Creek was lucky because they did not see the quick growth and was able to maintain their status quo for quite a few years. Times are changing for Queen Creek. The two lane roads in and out of the town will have to be widened not only for their residents, but also for the motorists that travel through the town in route to other locations. Large commercial entities like Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot and others are coming into Queen Creek. Why, because the population is increasing and that is what brings those types of businesses into an area. Queen Creek is getting a hospital. Why, because of the increase in population not only in Queen Creek, but the areas surrounding it. H, TOQC is getting those things because they are a city. Ask Banner why they asked to be annexed into TOQC. They will tell you because they do not want to deal with a county, only a municipality as they have already stated. Yes Mesa is built out, what I was saying is that it took them well over 60 years to try and implemtn a property tax. People are mentioning increased propert tax as if it would be the first thing on the agenda. You say TOQC is expnding (growing) that is why the big stores are coming in. Well we have TOQC by alot as far as population. Why are the big stores not coming here? Because Pinal don't push it, because this area has a bad reputation (due to certain people who think they speak for this area)- the reasons for this are out there. All one needs to do is make some calls and ask why nothing wants to come this way. This would cease to exist if we were a city, the county isn't concerned if stores come out here or not, look at the revenue they get from us just due to our large numbers. People need to open their eyes and wake up to reality. Nothing is going to change (and it will get worse for us) if we do not step up and become a city. There is no clearer way to put this.
Politics is power. Those with the power provide direction. Now if Queen Creek, a town of lets say of 20,000 only because I don’t have the exact number at my finger tips, annexes the Hunt Corridor with a population of lets say of 45,000, where do you think the power base would be? The power would immediately shift to the Hunt Corridor and those residents could immediately change the direction of Queen Creek by putting their own men/women in the office of Mayor or City Council. Those that have been in the Queen Creek power circles for years don’t want to see this happen but as I said earlier, times are changing for Queen Creek. There will be a day when they need the revenues from the roof tops that sit along the Hunt Corridor. That day may come sooner then you think.
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 01:10 pm |
|
Let me first say I’m a die heart conservative, believe government has their fingers in just too much of our lives already and I do believe this area needs some sort of governing structure. I’m just not convinced reinventing the wheel is the correct path.
Having a closed mind and not being willing to change resolves nothing. Only through discussion can one hopefully see another light or gain a different perspective of a situation. I’ve posted articles regarding incorporation in hopes people will read them, learn the process and in doing so be able to make rational decisions.
For you to say “I appreciate the information but your constant negative connotations and sarcastic questions aren’t appreciated” isn’t very political. If you have ambitions to go into politics, you had better toughen up that skin and learn to communicate without throwing barbs at your constituents or you will be on the loosing end of the stick more times then you wish. With statements like that you won’t even win your first election.
Cities require revenue streams to remain solvent. Mesa is approaching build out if they haven’t already and that is one of the reasons they are looking to implement a property tax. They need more revenue. Yes, it must go before the voters and it was voted down. Now what recourse does the city have? They start cutting services. Queen Creek was lucky because they did not see the quick growth and was able to maintain their status quo for quite a few years. Times are changing for Queen Creek. The two lane roads in and out of the town will have to be widened not only for their residents, but also for the motorists that travel through the town in route to other locations. Large commercial entities like Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot and others are coming into Queen Creek. Why, because the population is increasing and that is what brings those types of businesses into an area. Queen Creek is getting a hospital. Why, because of the increase in population not only in Queen Creek, but the areas surrounding it.
Politics is power. Those with the power provide direction. Now if Queen Creek, a town of lets say of 20,000 only because I don’t have the exact number at my finger tips, annexes the Hunt Corridor with a population of lets say of 45,000, where do you think the power base would be? The power would immediately shift to the Hunt Corridor and those residents could immediately change the direction of Queen Creek by putting their own men/women in the office of Mayor or City Council. Those that have been in the Queen Creek power circles for years don’t want to see this happen but as I said earlier, times are changing for Queen Creek. There will be a day when they need the revenues from the roof tops that sit along the Hunt Corridor. That day may come sooner then you think.
Last edited on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 01:46 pm by History_101
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 540 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:24 am |
|
vote4me_ChadR wrote: My reply to History 101:
How do you propose to get rid of property taxes and income taxes? Raise initial capital from donations and the State? Donations from whom? The only donation the State makes is welfare. So we all go on welfare so we can have a city? What are you smoking?
First of all you misunderstood what I was typing. By me saying that I would do away with all taxes that was pointing to my support of the Fair Tax and related initiatives. I also believe that in the initial phases of incorporation or getting the movement going people who support the movement will make donations to help get the message out there. There is money from the state for incorporated municipalities.
Even if this area incorporated, we would still be required to pay county property taxes, state and federal income taxes and to fund this thing called a city one would probably have to implement an increased sales tax levy, a city property tax, maybe even a secondary property tax and probably even utility taxes and that may not be enough for a startup city. This crap has been said time and time again. And it is just that....CRAP... If this were true then tell us why the city of Mesa tried for the first time in over 60 years (in 2006) to implement a property tax? It has been brought back up, not sure if it was on the agenda again or not. If this were true, then tell us why it took the TOQC 18 years to implement a property tax?
I know there are things that have to be taken care of from the outset of incorporation that will change once we incorporate but all these things have been dealt with by OTHER CITIES in this country. Incorporation has given cities the opportunities for growth and local protection.
Now who will be paying all these taxes? Each and every resident within the city limits. Is that what you want for all your friends and neighbors? You best do the poll and when you do, make sure you put out all the information as most residents are now stretched for income, loosing their jobs and the last thing they need to hear is more taxes coming their way because someone wants another layer of government
You know what, I’m a conservative and I’m against unneccesary taxation but yes the answer is we have to raise money and if you can come up with better ideas I’m open. The argument of adding another layer of government has negative connotations and NOTHING I have said is in the interests of adding government just to add government. I’m for increasing our exposure and building a community, don’t you want that? Why are you so against incorporation? What is it going to hurt? Are people having trouble financially? Yes, but somehow they still found a way to spend over $200 million dollars at the theaters this week to see Batman. Consumption taxes are fair taxes and the BEST way to raise revenue. You might want to open your mind and consider the other side of the issue, yeah we may have to implement a 2% sales tax or something like that but right now we are paying that money to all the other municipalities where we shop instead of funneling that money into our community where it should be. We are paying that tax no matter what, we may as well benefit from it. The cities and towns of Gilbert, Queen Creek, Mesa, Coolidge, and Florence thank you for helping continue the growth in their towns while ours fails because you are caught up in ONE issue that can be addressed. That's right.... sick of paying into someone elses coffers. It is time our money was used in our own backyard for once. Big deal, we would have to implement a sales tax.
The real reason a special census would have to be done is because the state pays money to cities/towns based on population. Now census’ are done every 10 years so if you were to incorporate today, you’d receive money from the state based on the 2000 census. What do you think the population of this area was in 2000? The influx of residents really started in 2003. GK is correct, a special census would have to be done and they are very expensive. The new city would be on the hook to pay for such an animal meaning more money out of your pocket.
I appreciate the information but your constant negative connotations and sarcastic questions aren’t appreciated. I have said time and time again to people who know me and on this forum that I don’t have all the answers and I’m not claiming to be the next Messiah for this area. I’m simply a concerned CITIZEN who is sick of the status quo and sick of the direction of this area and I’m trying to make something happen. We are missing out on a great opportunity to raise money by allowing the Banner hospital and all the associated development slip through our fingers. That money is going to the county to be wasted and used for areas like Florence, Coolidge, Kearny and all the other cities who are incorporated and HAVE NO RIGHT TO THE MONEY THAT SHOULD BE STAYING RIGHT WERE IT IS!!!! I didn’t include all the other information you added but I knew most of the information. Thank you for offering it though. Again we are paying the sales taxes already, we are just giving our money to other municipalities! Based on your information we will get a share of the registration fees from the MVD—isn’t that a good thing?
I don’t think anyone assumes that property taxes will drop after incorporation, the city doesn’t control that. Ron Reingel will help us with levying appropriate taxes, Bryan Martyn will bring accountability for our budget, and Paul Babeu will help with the accountability for spending in the Sheriff’s Office.
I’m sorry for some of the heat behind my replies but I’m sick and tired of the people against incorporation bring up the money issue over and over. That is ONE issue that I addressed in this forum and when the time comes, I’ll address in public. If we keep letting incorporation slip by and keep getting stuck on the money issue we are only hurting ourselves. Don't be sorry, you said nothing out of line. This same crap has been said for ages in all the other areas that were talking about incorporating, we can't, taxes will go up, police service will go down, we will be doomed, what a bunch of anti-city hogwash.
|
gk
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tonga |
| Posts: | 2110 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:24 am |
|
If we keep letting incorporation slip by and keep getting stuck on the money issue we are only hurting ourselves.
For many of us the money IS the issue. Some people desire incorporation and some do not. The only way that you can tell if an incorporation issue is even viable is to spend lots of money to find out what the residents really want, and not the very few of us on this darn blog.
|
vote4me_ChadR
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:02 am |
|
My reply to History 101:
How do you propose to get rid of property taxes and income taxes? Raise initial capital from donations and the State? Donations from whom? The only donation the State makes is welfare. So we all go on welfare so we can have a city? What are you smoking?
First of all you misunderstood what I was typing. By me saying that I would do away with all taxes that was pointing to my support of the Fair Tax and related initiatives. I also believe that in the initial phases of incorporation or getting the movement going people who support the movement will make donations to help get the message out there. There is money from the state for incorporated municipalities.
Even if this area incorporated, we would still be required to pay county property taxes, state and federal income taxes and to fund this thing called a city one would probably have to implement an increased sales tax levy, a city property tax, maybe even a secondary property tax and probably even utility taxes and that may not be enough for a startup city.
I know there are things that have to be taken care of from the outset of incorporation that will change once we incorporate but all these things have been dealt with by OTHER CITIES in this country. Incorporation has given cities the opportunities for growth and local protection.
Now who will be paying all these taxes? Each and every resident within the city limits. Is that what you want for all your friends and neighbors? You best do the poll and when you do, make sure you put out all the information as most residents are now stretched for income, loosing their jobs and the last thing they need to hear is more taxes coming their way because someone wants another layer of government
You know what, I’m a conservative and I’m against unneccesary taxation but yes the answer is we have to raise money and if you can come up with better ideas I’m open. The argument of adding another layer of government has negative connotations and NOTHING I have said is in the interests of adding government just to add government. I’m for increasing our exposure and building a community, don’t you want that? Why are you so against incorporation? What is it going to hurt? Are people having trouble financially? Yes, but somehow they still found a way to spend over $200 million dollars at the theaters this week to see Batman. Consumption taxes are fair taxes and the BEST way to raise revenue. You might want to open your mind and consider the other side of the issue, yeah we may have to implement a 2% sales tax or something like that but right now we are paying that money to all the other municipalities where we shop instead of funneling that money into our community where it should be. We are paying that tax no matter what, we may as well benefit from it. The cities and towns of Gilbert, Queen Creek, Mesa, Coolidge, and Florence thank you for helping continue the growth in their towns while ours fails because you are caught up in ONE issue that can be addressed.
The real reason a special census would have to be done is because the state pays money to cities/towns based on population. Now census’ are done every 10 years so if you were to incorporate today, you’d receive money from the state based on the 2000 census. What do you think the population of this area was in 2000? The influx of residents really started in 2003. GK is correct, a special census would have to be done and they are very expensive. The new city would be on the hook to pay for such an animal meaning more money out of your pocket.
I appreciate the information but your constant negative connotations and sarcastic questions aren’t appreciated. I have said time and time again to people who know me and on this forum that I don’t have all the answers and I’m not claiming to be the next Messiah for this area. I’m simply a concerned CITIZEN who is sick of the status quo and sick of the direction of this area and I’m trying to make something happen. We are missing out on a great opportunity to raise money by allowing the Banner hospital and all the associated development slip through our fingers. That money is going to the county to be wasted and used for areas like Florence, Coolidge, Kearny and all the other cities who are incorporated and HAVE NO RIGHT TO THE MONEY THAT SHOULD BE STAYING RIGHT WERE IT IS!!!! I didn’t include all the other information you added but I knew most of the information. Thank you for offering it though. Again we are paying the sales taxes already, we are just giving our money to other municipalities! Based on your information we will get a share of the registration fees from the MVD—isn’t that a good thing?
I don’t think anyone assumes that property taxes will drop after incorporation, the city doesn’t control that. Ron Reingel will help us with levying appropriate taxes, Bryan Martyn will bring accountability for our budget, and Paul Babeu will help with the accountability for spending in the Sheriff’s Office.
I’m sorry for some of the heat behind my replies but I’m sick and tired of the people against incorporation bring up the money issue over and over. That is ONE issue that I addressed in this forum and when the time comes, I’ll address in public. If we keep letting incorporation slip by and keep getting stuck on the money issue we are only hurting ourselves.
Last edited on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:03 am by vote4me_ChadR
|
pipeman
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 540 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:00 am |
|
never mind, not worth getting into it.
Last edited on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 06:01 am by pipeman
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 01:37 am |
|
Nothing posted. Isn't this editor just wonderful?
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 185 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 01:10 am |
|
2 cents wrote: Guess I've got the term wrong. What I was trying to describe was where the voters agree to pay an additional, let's say, 1/2 cent to fund the construction of something like a community water system or a community waste treating facility. The bond is sold, the desired whatever is built and the 1/2 cent is collected, generally through a sales tax, until the bond is paid off then the sales tax is no longer collected. BOND may not be the correct term and I'll be happily enlightened.
2
I think you understand it correctly. A city takes out a bond say for 5 million dollars for an upgrade to their water or sewer system. The residents are then assessed a percentage each year as a supplemental tax to pay it back say over 20 years. The people that sell the bond gets a cut and the investors gets a dividend of say 5% a year for the use of their money which is paid back when the bond matures. The bond is rated and the higher the rating the more secure the bond is. You can buy municipal bonds from almost any broker. It is usually a good investment; however, it is possible for the city to go into bankruptcy and default on the bond. Now this is bad for the investors wouldn’t you think? Cities do go broke and do file for bankruptcy. I always look at the municipality before buying that type of bonds. Now I wouldn’t buy bonds from a newly formed city because there is just too much that could cause the city to fail and I’d be out my money along with the other investors. Now I guess the city could take out an insurance policy but that is going to cost some bucks. It all comes back to the residents having to repay the bond as there are no free lunches out there. Everyone thinks there is an endless supply of government money, but that money has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is right out of your pockets in the form of new taxes.
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 208 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 12:28 am |
| | |