Rogers: Council looks for suggestions for sales tax to maintain preserve and parks

Wonderful, contrived by the city, mayors and councils for a better Scottsdale. Of course, like everything else, not in a vacuum, the land that could have been single-family homes from the McDowells (remember Mayor Drinkwater, “everyone in Scottsdale will always have our McDowell Mountain View’s” promise) and they would have been contributing tax payers supporting a network of parks, pools and natural preserve shared by, supported by and shared by the residents of Scottsdale.

Fast-forward to the new millennia and developers’ dreams of maximizing their profits on land that has fixed dimensions, unless of course we allow them to build upwards not two stories, but five, six, seven, eight or higher! The cost to the citizenry taxpayers? Traffic, congestion, water shortages, loss of views, ambience, safety, kind of like everything that Paradise Valley is not. The promise, not kept.

Now, with over 10,000-plus apartment units being planned, allowing a populace to share in the Scottsdale experience without the commitment for schools, these same parks, pools, hiking trails, heretofore safety, would have these residents riding the wave of a free ride while the homeowner pays the tariff.

So, why not mayor, city council, as part of any approvals on multi-family dwellings – especially in light of the temptation for AirBnb/Vrbo profiteering – strategize a way that these itinerant residents share in the cost either in a renter’s tax collected against a lease or monthly, or mandated by short-term rental laws a sublet tax that is paid direct to the city coffers as part of the written legal agreement. Cumbersome, yes, but also fair. As these people share in everything Scottsdale is, so too should be their commitment for this lifestyle, reputation; as especially with AirBnb/Vrbo, these come at the cost of diminished hotel receipts and taxes paid to the city.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.