| 10/11/2007 |
| Should residents vote to establish home rule? He says: Home rule inconsistent with city 'vision' |
| By: Rod Bockenfeld |
I
personally will be voting "NO" on establishing a home rule
committee. As an elected official who represents eastern Centennial,
I respect the fact that my constituents should have the opportunity
to vote on this important matter. They should also have the
opportunity to hear and evaluate both sides of the issue before they
cast that vote.
Centennial already has a vision. It was supposed to be a low-tax, limited government city. The city was physically formed and politically structured to meet this objective. The city was formed on a 1.5 percent sales tax and a 5 mill levy property tax. Since that time, they raised a 3 percent franchise fee, received another sales tax increase of 1 percent, added an automobile use tax of 2.5 percent, de-Bruced the city in order to keep excess revenues under the TABOR Amendment, raised a storm water fee that showed up on your most recent property tax bill and now has set the foundation for that same storm water fee to increase by 5 percent next year and possibly every year thereafter. Also keep in mind, property values thus property tax revenues have increased substantially over the past six years. The city has received some serious revenue increases. Matter-of-fact, the city's revenues doubled in four very short years from 2002 to 2006. The most important point for you to understand about the Centennial today is this: With all of these tax and fee increases and if the city remains a limited-service city, it is a financially sustainable city. It is the city leaders' desire to grow that is causing the biggest problems. Growth in the city is not paying for itself. If our city leaders would focus their energies on sustaining finances and providing adequate services to their constituents, there would be no need to create a new vision. However, the current focus seems to be more on growing the administration and creating incentives for additional development. Currently, Centennial is structured as a statutory city. This structure supports the original vision of the city. Why change from a statutory city to a home rule city? The best argument in the city's flier is, "Because everyone else our size has done it." I don't find this to be a solid argument. They also claim they need more flexibility in how they can create new ordinances and regulations to better serve the people. Do we need new laws or do we need to do a better job enforcing the exiting laws? There are many who believe it is the latter. The city's flier is quick to point out that home rule is not about a tax increase. I believe it is. Anybody who has been in government knows that more flexibility in creating new laws, ordinances or regulations carries with it a fiscal note. Unless the city is cash flowing excessive revenues already, which it is not, the flexibility of home rule will only set the stage for the next round of tax increases. If service levels are raised without a supporting increase in revenues, our city leaders will be back in a few years to ask the voters for another tax increase. If not received, they will have no other choice but to explain that services will have to be reduced. These will be the same services that they are about to increase with this new flexibility. By voting against forming a home rule committee, I believe I will be sending several important messages to our city leaders. I expect them to establish an efficient and financially sustainable city before they try to grow the city. I expect them to make sure that growth pays for itself. Lastly and most importantly, my vision for this city is for it to remain a low-tax and limited-government city. Rod Bockenfeld represents District 3, which includes eastern Centennial, on the Arapahoe County Board of Commissioners. He was elected in 2004. |
