The Princeton City Council discussed and moved along its proposed business development district during a meeting on Monday night.
The development district serves a similar role to a tax increment financing district by providing funding for business and redevelopment projects, although it relies on sales tax revenue instead of property taxes.
Mayor Ray Mabry said the district would serve as another economic development tool for the city.
“It’s just part of our toolbox,” Mabry said. “Not one thing’s going to solve all of our problems, but we’ve got a toolbox of tools we can use to help bring our community forward in a positive manner.”
If created, the district would be paid for through an additional sales tax on certain retail purchases made within the district. Notably, the tax would only apply to items meant for “immediate consumption,” such as meals at a restaurant, snacks or drinks, but would not apply to groceries, prescription drugs or titled items such as vehicles.
While the ordinance to move the proposal to a second reading and public hearing scheduled for two weeks from now, on Monday, March 16, council members had different views on it, with two voting no.
Councilman Jerry Newman voted against advancing the ordinance, saying he believes residents should have the final say.
“In my 11 years on the city council, we have always held referendums for proposed tax increases,” Newman said. “I don’t think the city council should make this decision on their own.”
While Newman and councilman Hector Gomez felt that more information needed to be out there, others felt the city had made enough effort to educate the public while gathering feedback.
Specifically, councilman Michael McCall said the city hosting a town hall meeting about the district was a step toward transparency and getting feedback.
“I would disagree that we haven’t educated the voters enough,” McCall said. “I actually think we’ve done a really good job to this point.”
During public comment, Princeton resident Geraldine Woodlief questioned which businesses would be affected and whether enough outreach had been conducted.
“Which businesses will not use the tax to fix something that will be charging their customers this additional half percent?” Woodlief said. “I’m rather confused, and so are a lot of other people.”
Woodlief said she spoke with local business owners and residents who expressed concerns about the tax. She also said many people in the community are unaware of the proposal and hopes the city will continue educating the public on it.
City officials responded that the tax would apply to retail purchases within the district but would not include gasoline, groceries or prescription medications.
The council ultimately voted 3-2, with Newman and Gomez voting against, to move the ordinance forward.
A public hearing will be held on Monday, March 16, at 6 p.m. at City Hall before the council gives a final green light for the district.