Ontario Revenue Committee wraps up its work
Board will now present its ideas to City Council in July
By JESSICA KELLER
ARGUS OBSERVER
Thursday, June 12, 2008 2:11 PM PDT
ONTARIO — The Ontario Revenue Committee met for the last time Wednesday evening at City Hall as members unanimously agreed they had accomplished what they set out to do — generate ideas for the City Council’s consideration.
The committee has met for the past few months with the purpose of producing revenue-generating ideas for the city’s General Fund. The next task for the Revenue Committee will be to present those ideas to the council at its first meeting in July. One of the last motions the committee made was to elect member Max Chavez to explain the ideas to the council.
One of the reasons the committee selected Chavez was because he helped establish the matrix for the rating system used to rank each of the ideas produced.
Committee member Bruce Hunter made a motion to accept Chavez’s rating matrix and proceed forward with the ranking system and criteria as it was intended.
He also made the motion to adjourn for the last time, stating the committee produced a number of ideas, with many different projected revenues each would bring in, for the council’s consideration, and he submitted to the committee it had done all it could do.
Hunter said the committee has sat there and discussed, hashed out and rehashed a number of ideas for a long time. He said, Wednesday, the City Council considered what should be done about funding the Ontario golf course, agreed to set aside funds from contingency to make improvements and, in doing so, committed to keeping it open. A couple years ago, he continued, the City Council had the same discussions about the Aquatic Center and the library.
“Only at this point, one proposal even comes anywhere near close enough to getting the money the city needs,” Hunter said, referring to the estimated $3.3 million a 1 percent sales tax would produce, which he and member Gary Halcolm put forth for the Revenue Committee’s consideration.
“I think we’re wasting our time to sit here and talk and rehash everything out,” Hunter said.
Member Larry Heidbrink suggested the committee present to the City Council everything it has come up with, including the rating system, which other committee members agreed was a good idea.
Committee member Audrey Jacobs said she thought the committee members next needed to help inform the public of what ideas they came up with, what those ideas entailed of, how they were reached and why.
“We have to inform the public, and that’s going to be a problem,” she said, adding if regular citizens don’t understand how a measure works or what it will accomplish and why, they won’t agree to it.”
Committee member Michael Allen said he agreed once the City Council agrees to something committee members can participate individually in the education process, but as a group, there was nothing more it could do.
“As far as this group, we’ve done our job,” Allen said.
City Council member John Gaskill said, in addition to presenting the ideas to the council, the person making the presentation should also include backgrounds to each of the proposals, including where they have been used before and how successful they have been. That was something Mayor Joe Dominick had requested of the committee before, Gaskill reminded the board members.
The committee agreed that was something Chavez could include in his report with the ideas and their rankings. The committee was not able to determine the effects of all the suggestions.
The revenue-generating ideas the committee will present include the 1 percent sales tax, an asphalt tax, a 1 percent transient occupancy tax increase, a food and beverage tax, $100 business license tax, property tax levy, accident response charge, 1 percent gross receipts assessment charge, rental unit annual fee, 1 percent gas tax, city income tax, square foot retail charge and out of state payroll tax.
