73° F
6 The Rollingwood proposition to take half of the sales tax money dedicated to the Rollingwood Community Development Corporation and put it in a street maintenance fund passed by a narrow margin of 30 votes.
While election day results came in opposed to the proposition, 150 to 139, it wasn’t enough to override early voters who came out in favor of it 99 to 53, for a total tally of 238 to 203, or 54 percent to 46 percent.
“I was a little disappointed we didn’t have a better turnout,” Mayor Dale Dingley said. “We usually have more than that, maybe there just wasn’t enough on the ballot that interested people.”
The RCDC currently has about $500,000 in its bank account and receives a sales tax check of approximately $14,000 each month. The latter figure will be divided in half beginning April 1, according to the Texas tax code, as the other half goes into the dedicated street maintenance fund.
This year’s RCDC budget, totaling about $400,000, includes up to $250,000 for the commercial portion of the Edgegrove water line, but with the extremely low bid on the project, that portion connecting to Bee Cave Road will only cost $90,000.
“I was against the proposal to begin with, Dingley said. “The idea of a street maintenance tax is a good one. I encouraged the council to look at that some time in the future after we determined the finances of all of our water system upgrades. Right now as long as there was the potential to use some 4B money for some of our water system upgrades, we should hold off.”
Dingley also said he was concerned that residents may have been felt as though this tax change would mean that the streets would be paved.
“That will cost us an estimated $1 million,” he said. “If we collect $84,000, it will take 10 years before we can repave.”
Alderwoman Shanthi Jayakumar said she also has concerns with possible perceptions of the resolution.
“There was nothing scary in what was proposed, and some people took it to mean that their taxes were going up; some people took it to mean they might lose their parks; and some people thought the RCDC might be dissolved,” she said.
She said she believed the city was remiss in not disseminating more information at an earlier date. She went on to say that street maintenance items budgeted for in the 2008-09 budget were not actualized.
“To me, it seemed like it was a good idea to me to start the fund, so five years down the line, we are not at the same place we were at before,” she said. “There is no reason we have to wait until we have the entire amount we need.”
The first paragraph is very misleading. Half of the money is NOT being “taken” from the RCDC! This is exactly what lead to voter confusion. The large amount of money will remain with the RCDC and the division of sales tax will not begin until next April. By that time, the RCDC will have nearly $600,000 to play with. That amount will continue to grow at a faster rate than the RCDC can come up with projects to spend it on. Lets be real.
Again, why is Mayor Dingley disapponted with the voter turnout? We DON’T usually have a bigger turnout than this one. He is incorrect. He is probably disappointed that it did not go his way.
The mayor needs to be very careful with the information he protrays to the public. We need facts.
Mayor Dingley did not seem to want the RCDC to utilize the 4B sales taxes for water system improvements. That is a new excuse made to try and keep the voters in the dark about what the sales tax money was actually being spent on. The RCDC was not wanting this money used for water system improvements and was fighting this with the mayor’s blessing. Telling us to wait until the future for some money to appear for street maintenance is poppycock. The mayor was ignoring our streets, wanting to RAISE property taxes to the maximum, and waste our money on low priority items.
Our park (we just have one) will remain extremely well funded. We need to have those outside groups that make money for themselves off of our public park through subleases, etc. and enjoy the new facilities to help offset the burden to the citizens. Where is the city’s cut from those subleases?? So, the citizens need half of the sales taxes because our park is developed just fine and we don’t really NEED to to provide a park with everything including the kitchen sink for others to profit from while our roads and water system are in crappy shape. Pretty darn simple.
Yes, it is clear that the mayor is upset about the outcome of the election, not the “low” turnout as voter turnout was very high.
Somehow the citizens need to educate our mayor again about where the park improvements actually came from. In his column, the mayor makes untrue claims again. RCDC did not exist and could not have provided the wonderful playscapes in the lower park!! Why does our mayor insist on not listening to the truth and why does he insist on having this untrue information given to the newspaper again? Some of us women in Rollingwood would like to know why the mayor does not want to tell the public what women in the neighborhood and the Rollingwood Women’s Club have done to help build Rollingwood Park.
Will the Picayune print a correction on the mayor’s statement?
Enjoying a glass of wine from Sprouts as I peruse the Picayune.
Geez, what’s with the mayor now? He seems at odds with this council since last May. I do believe he is charged with ensuring the council decisions are carried even out while dealing with his own angst. Perhaps he could use a glass of wine from Sprouts too.
At what point do we look into what council decisions have not been carried out under Mayor Dingley’s term? Where are those approved fire hydrants that disappeared from Timberline and Vale Streets? Oh, but those were determined to be unimportant and deleted from the list approved by council. Council decisions are final so that, by the way, is a no-no.
” Oh where , oh where have my fire hydrants gone? Oh where, oh where can they be?” I’m a little worried about the Christmas – er- “holiday” lights contest. Is it safe to put lights on my house without a fire hydrant nearby? (Question of the week.)
And what a nice show of votes last week! Can our mayor appreciate that in spite of his attempts to influence the vote? Cheers to alderwoman Jayakumar for writing to the Picayune to spell out the facts so those of us concerned with facts could make an educated, well-thought out decision about where our tax money goes. Facts are good in the long run. Honest.
Drunkblogger- Please do some fact checking before you write after too much wine.
First- the Utilities Commission recommended placing fire hydrants 500 feet apart versus the recommended 300 feet. You might listen to the tapes to hear who made this recommendation and the arguments to support the decision…..
Second- Some of the fire hydrants on Vale and Timberline are unable to be put in because we only have a 4 inch water line in those locations versus a 6 inch line which is needed for fire hydrants. You might find out who pushed for those water line upgrades not to be a priority or to be done…. Water Commission, Utility Commission, Current Council members….
If I am correct- Mayor Dingley does not have a vote. Those who have a vote and voted against proper fire hydrant placement and to not upgrade our entire system should be held accountable for the fire protection failure.
But- instead of blaming someone yet again- why don’t we see how it could be fixed and fix it. It may mean doing more water projects but right now construction costs are low- take advantage now because in five years when inflation is high, interest rates have increased and the cost of goods and services are more we may be in more trouble than we are now.
Ms. “Fire Hydrants” — Here we go again on this spend and borrow perversion. Borrow to fix the water system and raise taxes while spending money like crazy on things most of us don’t want or need. Who voted to ignore the water system and pave a parking lot instead? Not our current council majority! The mayor is responsible for aiding and abetting in this decision while ignoring the outcries of the community. I agree with our current council for wanting to use the money we have for these improvements instead of borrowing after too much spending by the previous council. And whose been fighting the use of 4B tax money for water system upgrades? Certainly not the majority on our current council who you imply is at fault here.
And, who had the authority to change the vote of the council on the number of fire hydrants? No one. So, who did it? Maybe the mayor will claim he told someone to do it. Only the council can revisit its decision and then vote again to change a previous vote. Where is the outrage?
I think drunkblogger is pretty close to accurate even after having a glass of wine. I wish I knew who he/she was and I’d offer to help create a Rollingwood Drunkblogging Association to go head to head with fact-checking of another politically active group led by a member of the RCDC, the Rollingwood Neighborhood Association.
So we are “in trouble now” because of “costs”, potential “inflation”, and a general lack of money as “Fire Hydrants” says? If that wasn’t so ironic it would be uproariously funny. I think many of us were predicitng that over a year ago because of the “spend freely, spend fast” attitude, remember? Why doesn’t that commenter just call him/herself “Park Asphalt” instead and be done with the b.s.?
Maybe a 6″ water line for FIRE SAFETY and HYDRANTS was a tad more important to the community (and health, safety and welfare) than park asphalt last year, and a heck of a lot cheaper.
So, we are “in trouble now” as the wasteful spenders say. Funny.