Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Grand Junction eliminates sales-tax vendor fee; council cites state alignment and budget considerations

Grand Junction City Council
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council adopted Ordinance 52-90 to eliminate the city's sales-tax vendor fee to align with a statewide change. Staff said the fiscal impact was included in the recently approved budget; business representatives warned small firms and restaurants will feel the loss.

Grand Junction City Council on Wednesday voted unanimously to eliminate the local vendor’s fee that vendors retain when remitting sales tax, adopting Ordinance No. 52-90 on final passage.

City staff said the change aligns local code with a state policy that goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, and that the city has consistently aligned with state sales-and-use tax laws for predictability. Jay Valentine, presenting the ordinance, explained the fee was originally intended to offset administrative costs when many businesses used paper systems; modern accounting has greatly reduced that burden.

Staff presented fiscal context during the item: the top 100 accounts account for a large share of the retained amount, while the remaining 2,427 businesses retained an average of about $30.45 monthly (approximately $364 annually). City staff and the CFO said the budget the council approved assumed elimination of the fee and that keeping the fee would have required cutting about $1.5 million from the approved budget.

A Chamber representative, Candace Carnahan, thanked staff for engagement but urged council to remember small businesses’ tight margins, saying that "small business is feeling those pressures." Council members who voiced support said aligning with the state provides consistency for businesses; some members asked staff to revisit the issue if sales tax revenues exceed projections in future years.

Council Member Stout moved and Council Member Wynne seconded the ordinance; roll-call vote was 7–0.

What the ordinance does: it amends municipal code provisions concerning the sales-tax vendor fee and lodging-tax vendor fee so that vendors may no longer retain the credited percentage; staff said the change does not alter tax rates but affects the portion vendors retain for remittance.

Clarification: the transcript contains inconsistent references to the exact vendor-fee percentage (both “0.333%” and “3.33%” were mentioned in the staff presentation). Staff presented average retention figures and the budget impact as the guiding fiscal information for council.

Motion details: Ordinance No. 52-90 adopted (mover: Council Member Stout; second: Council Member Wynne; vote: 7–0).