With elections approaching in April and political concerns paramount, Evanston City Council on Monday continued its search for creative ways to make up a $1.3 million budget deficit without further raising their constituents’ property taxes.
Aldermen proposed and discussed various revenue alternatives at the council’s 2001-02 budget workshop Monday night, including a 2 percent tax on packaged liquor, a 1 percent tax on any food and beverages, and increases in fees for liquor licenses and the city’s recycling program.
The council, which also is considering a 9 percent property tax increase and a 10 percent increase in sewer fees, has a March 1 deadline to implement a balanced budget.
The package liquor tax and the food and beverage tax – both of which the city currently doesn’t levy – were introduced by Ald. Ann Rainey (8th), who complained that property taxes were draining Evanston residents.
“The great thing about (these taxes) is everyone pays – not just the property owners,” Rainey said. “We have to start looking at some of these other taxes.”
But Ald. Arthur Newman (1st), whose ward includes downtown Evanston and many of the city’s restaurants, asked if neighboring towns such as Skokie and Wilmette had similar taxes, suggesting the matter be left open for public input.
“When you can afford to pay $7 for an ill-poured glass of wine,” Rainey replied, “if you can’t afford an additional 7 cents, then you should go to Skokie to drink.”
The food and beverage tax would cover all food and beverage in Evanston, including non-alcoholic beverages and take-out food. The tax on packaged liquor would affect alcohol sold in liquor stores.
The city estimated that the two taxes would generate for the city a combined revenue of $976,000. This revenue would make up for the more than $1 million in revenue the city would have gained from its controversial head tax proposal, which was tabled two weeks ago.
The recycling fee increase, which would raise the amount residents pay from $1 to $3, was suggested by Ald. Dennis Drummer (2nd), who said the city needs to stop subsidizing the program. The recycling program costs the city $400,000, he said, and those residents who use the program should pay for it instead of “dumping the cost” on property-tax payers. The fee increase would show up on residents’ water and sewage bills.
But Rainey said she was concerned about charging people who recycle because they are reducing the city’s solid waste stream.
“The recycling deadbeats in our community are adding to our sanitation costs,” she said. “We should be fining people who aren’t recycling.”
Other measures brought up included transferring authority over emergency assistance services from the city to Evanston Township.
If each of the proposed revenue alternatives is passed, the city will see a surplus of $392,000, but aldermen said they expect further debate on the proposals during a public hearing on the budget that will be held at 7 p.m. Feb. 12 at the Evanston Civic Center.
Several residents attended Monday’s meeting, which began with public comment.
“Please hold the line on property taxes,” said Evanston resident Chuck Bodkin, who said he was concerned the council tabled the head tax and now would have to raise property taxes.
Evanston property manager Jim Schermerhorn echoed Bodkin’s concerns, saying the council should continue looking to Northwestern for help with its deficit.
“High taxes are making it hard for some of these businesses to make it,” Schermerhorn said, adding that an increase in sewer fees instead of property taxes would be the lesser of two evils. “Northwestern has to pay (sewer fees), but it does not have to pay property taxes.”
