Proponents of the Blytheville's new 1 percent Sales and Usage Tax point to the fact that with Blytheville's loss of population, there has been an annual reduction in revenue of $4.6 million since 2008. They also point to the fact that despite the loss of population, the city still possesses the infrastructure and area of a city twice its current size, and have not cut a single city service to its citizens.
They argue that not only is there a reduction in revenue, but that the city is actually paying some of its bills which previous administrations did not do. There has been a reduction in the revenue at the golf course and a reduction in purchasing power of 14 percent due to inflation, as well. This means that one dollar from 2008 will only buy about 86 cents worth of product today. Simply put, things cost more than they used to and the city receives less revenue. They argue that it is impossible to maintain, much less grow at that rate.
Those in favor of the tax also insist that, while the entire state has difficulty maintaining the condition of its infrastructure (such as streets, water and sewer), Blytheville was behind to begin with and is even worse now. The appearance of a city, whether it be dilapidated structures, overgrown vegetation or streets that have buckled and pocked full of holes, makes a difference when businesses and visitors decide whether or not to do business in Blytheville.
City employees have not received a pay raise since 2008 and therefore recruitment and retention are a real problem. There has been a turnover of 45 police officers in the last five years alone.
That is more than the current size of the entire department. The other city departments have experienced similar turnover. Additionally, with the state mandated increase in minimum wage going to $8.50 next January, the Mayor has proposed a 13 percent pay raise for all city employees (to be implemented in two phases) in attempt to make city pay more competitive in comparison to other municipalities and/or industries. It also is an attempt to recover most of the loss of purchasing power lost due to inflation.
Mayor James Sanders has repeatedly said that the city is responsible for taking care of all people, in all parts of Blytheville. He said that includes Westminster Village, which was in much better shape when the city inherited it, but that time has taken its toll.
Proponents say that the increase in revenue will allow the city to build a cash reserve for the city, fix streets, build a community center for the youth, rehabilitate some of the city's water infrastructure, clean up the community, remove dilapidated structures, provide for employee pay raises, repurpose the former armory as a justice center, hire and retain more police officers, increase the quality of life factors Blytheville citizens desire, and create an atmosphere where growth can occur and opportunities can be seized when they present themselves.
Some proponents have even mentioned the ability to make proactive decisions that will allow the city to avoid future expenses, such as building a city jail where prisoners can be housed until sent to state prisons, instead of paying the county to house them.
Proponents insist that the tax increase will not be detrimental to local businesses because when the city tax was at its highest (2.25 percent) during Sanders' first term, there was no indication of sales dropping. The administration said that they have not seen any empirical data, including from the Arkansas Department of Finance Administration, that suggests sales will be significantly affected. They also point to the tax rate of comparable cities across the state and their city tax rates. Blytheville has one of the lowest city tax rates (though one of the highest combined sales tax rates). Additionally, proponents have argued that if a person spent $100 in Jonesboro, they would save $4.50 in taxes, but that would not cover the cost of gasoline to drive there.
Proponents argue that 45-50 percent of the revenue (projected $2.8 million) collected from this tax, if approved, will be paid by the spending of those living out of town. They argue that other methods of raising funds would require Blytheville citizens to carry the entire load. Countering the argument by Main Street Merchants that the tax would hurt their businesses, proponents say that "Main Streets" are experiences and that before shoppers can be drawn to downtown, they must first pass through the other portions of the city. They argue that if things look too bad in the other parts of town, shoppers may never make it all the way downtown -- they may simply turn around and just leave the city. Therefore, the city beautification, which proponents say would come from this new revenue stream, would actually help downtown business.
The administration insists that all projects they are hoping to accomplish if the tax passes, is in the top ten items agreed upon as imperative quality of life improvements necessary for Blytheville as outlined and approved by the City Council and by local steering committees as a part of the East Arkansas Planning Commission and Delta Bridge projects.
Answering allegations of fiscal mismanagement as a reason not to pass the tax, proponents point out that the city has overcome the reduction in revenue thus far through sound management, including: saving approximately $50,000 per year since implementing a fuel card system, saving $500,000 per year with the new sanitation trucks and new routes, saving $12,000 per year in cell phone usage, operating 24 fewer city employees (many in supervisory positions) since 2008, salary reductions of $200,000 since 2010 and being much more aggressive in finding the lowest possible purchasing prices.
thenry@blythevillecourier.com