Charles Vascellaro’s idea last week regarding a fee for public safety services, rather than a primary property tax (PPT) was brought up over a year ago during the VisionFH workshop. Back then, 91 percent of the attendees supported a PPT.

It’s true the council can establish a fee and designate its purpose, but it’s not set in stone; the council can change it anytime, for any reason, and any amount.

To resolve the never-ending “fee vs. tax” debate, a decision must be made on which alternative is the fairest. In the case of a fee, each parcel pays the same amount. Whereas, with a tax, each parcel pays a different amount based on assessed property values. With a fee, a $100,000 condo will pay the same as a $1 million home and the same as Safeway or Target. Another difference is a fee is not tax-deductible, but a PPT is deductible on both state and federal income tax returns.

With a PPT the county is set up to bill each property owner, but the county is not set up to bill for fees. The town must bill fees and to do that, it must hire an outside agency, at a cost.

It’s true that state statutes permit councils to increase a PPT 2 percent per year without a vote of the people, but history has shown it’s seldom done. Should a PPT be approved in Fountain Hills and should future councils increase the tax 2 percent each year, the public can simply take control by voting in a new Council (three members plus the mayor are elected every two years).

VisionFH researched all known ways to pay for Fountain Hills’ quality of life amenities and took the pulse of 2,000 residents. If you are interested in the results, go online to ILoveFountainHills.org.