SALEM - With a 5-2 vote, the Committee of the Whole said yes to drafting legislation that will place a half-percent, four-year capital improvement-only income tax before voters in November.
The issue now moves to city council.
Councilmen Earl A. Schory II and Dave Nestic voted against the request after almost two hours of discussion on it, and the recent city flooding that was not on the agenda.
Nestic also provided a two-page outline of a suggested alternative revenue/expense plan.
If voters approve the tax it will provide an additional $1.6 to $1.8 million for capital improvements only and not for operating expenses and payroll.
The city allocates money through an 85 percent general fund and 15 percent capital improvement fund split but several council members did not want to see that tampered with.
Wolford explained that streets and infrastructure were suffering from neglect and wanted council to place the issue before voters.
The ballot placement deadline is Aug. 18 at the county boards of election.
Wolford said zeroed in on the recent flooding as an example of infrastructure shortcomings and the concrete streets that are deteriorating.
Schory voted "no" because he didn't feel a crisis had been demonstrated with lights being turned off and personnel layoffs.
"What's happened to convince the public?" he asked, was it that council wanted to "feel good that we tried?"
He said Salem was a "very proud, wealthy" town and could afford what it pays for, but not now.
Schory said it wasn't that the money wasn't there.
"We don't have the citizens."
Nestic said he was "never really sure" about efficiency and that he had not heard of alternative measures. He said he could vote to place it before voters "if I felt we were doing everything we can."
Nestic said he might back it if priorities were established beforehand but also noted it was a tax that some people could vote for and then not have to pay. He said that was unfair and ultimately voted "no."
Councilman Dennis Groves said, "At one percent, we're just at a dead end." He said the increase should be longer that four years.
Nestic's plan addressed immediate measures, establishment of an operations improvement committee with six action items aimed at returning to a 60/40 split based on it.
"What else could we do?" Nestic asked, noting the plan was a "fresh look."
One suggestion was using interest from Utilities Department investments, about $600,000 worth of interest this year and several members seemed to like that, but Schory said it would hurt "in the long run."
Nestic also suggested a combination of income tax, property tax and reciprocity so that everyone contributed and Councilwoman Mary Ann Dzuracky asked him if there was a formula for the taxes.
Nestic said it needed to be studied with different scenarios."
Regarding the increase, Groves said, "I'd just as soon make it permanent," and Councilman Bret Apple said if it passed that wouldn't mean "we stop trying to save ... we still have that duty."
He called Nestic's proposal "excellent" but want to wait to the point of layoffs and then implement it.
"I don't want to be behind the eight ball and catch up from there," Apple said, adding the utilities department investment interest "could be used to show people, in a small part, that we are good stewards."
The biggest complaint was regarding streets, he said, but noted the trade-off, you can have streets but there will be layoffs ... and then people don't want to lose services.
"The city doesn't want to tax you, it wants you to decide," Apple said, explaining he didn't want it to turn out like the state lottery which used betting profits for schools but then took other designated school money away.
"I would oppose that," he said while Groves, and a guest, attorney David Duff, also alluded to that point.
Councilman Clyde Brown voted to have an ordinance drawn up but said after talking to "hundreds" of residents, "It will not pass."
He added, "They want us to live within our budget." He said Nestic had some good points with his alternatives and Councilwoman Rita Joseph O'Leary said, "We need things done, the work is eminent, floods, streets. I would like to see it on the ballot and let the voters decide.
"Tell them we have issues, but at least place it on the ballot. We're in a crunch area."
Meeting guests, Larry Bowersock and Patty Colian, spoke in favor of the increase, while two others, Paul Winkler, a Washington Avenue resident and Ann Kafka, who worked on Pennsylvania Avenue, spoke at length about flooding problems there.
Less than two weeks ago the city endured another heavy rain that dropped four inches water that flooded streets, basements and filled the Centennial Park retention pond almost to the top.
Referring to the $400,000 retention pond, which Winkler said made things worse, Schory, the parks committee chairman, recalled speaking with Jim Bonfert, an East Pershing Street resident and a retired engineer who had warned before it was built that it wouldn't work.
Schory said, "Those of us who are here tonight know he was right."
Winkler said, "I don't want to give a dollar to anyone without fixing that (area flooding)."
Service Safety Director Steve Andres said it will take about 2,000 truckloads to dredge out Buttermilk Creek running along Pennsylvania Avenue. He said he was working it now, but was unsure if that would fix it.
Groves said they can at least draw up an ordinance and be prepared at council's next meeting for a first reading.
Larry Shields can be reached at lshields@salemnews.net
