Are 'construction and pinball' to blame for lower sales tax revenues in P.C.? by Christopher Smart Most retail sales blossomed blos-somed last summer at a rate of 20 percent above those of the preceding year. But the total retail sales tax figures remain a mystery to the city government because the "official" tally for 1983 is down some 6.6 percent compared to 1982. According to Gilbert Nes-bitt Nes-bitt of the Revenue Accounting Account-ing Division of the Utah State Tax Commission, gross taxable sales for the third quarter of 1983 totaled $14,587,344 in Park City. That figure, he said, is some 6.6 percent below the summer sum-mer months of July, August and September of 1982 when sales reached more than $18 million here. But Nesbitt's figures are perplexing, according to City Manager Arlene Loble, because sales were up this year in three of five categories categor-ies with a fourth remaining roughly equivalent to last year. Retail sales figures are tallied quarterly by the state because under Utah law a percentage of the sales taxes collected in individual communities com-munities is returned to them. In 1982 Park City Municipal Corporation received re-ceived $132,235 based on three quarters of one percent per-cent return on retail sales in the third quarter. For the same period in 1983 that figure is $123,484. But there could be something some-thing amiss with that tabula tion, according to Loble, because the largest of the sales categories, known as "direct" sales, increased substantially in 1983. Recently, Re-cently, she said, the city received a return of $96,441 from "direct" sales, a figure 20 percent over the 1982 return. "Direct" sales include everything except "construction "con-struction and pinball," "utilities," "util-ities," "motor vehicle sales," and a category called "indirect miscellaneous miscellan-eous sales." While "direct" sales were climbing last summer, according ac-cording to the Tax Commission, Commis-sion, tax revenues on construction con-struction materials and arcade ar-cade games were plummet- ing in Park City. The city's return in 1983 in the category listed as "construction and pinball" was only one sixth of what it was for the third quarter of the preceding year. The possibility exists, Loble said, that the construction con-struction figures may be in error. She noted 1983 was a more active year in the building industry here than the summer of 1982. She said that the city's new finance director, Donn Kaynor, is making a full investigation into the tabulations made by the Tax Commission. That research, however, may be slow in coming, she said, because obtaining the basic sales information from the State Tax Commission has proven to be very difficult. "We will continue on our quest to find those construction figures," Loble said. She said that the city may have to analyze the gross taxable sales of every business. In addition to the regular redistribution of sales taxes, for the first time Park City will receive additional monies mon-ies from the "Resort Cities Sales Tax" which went into effect on July 1, 1983. And 4 although the distribution of j the new tax is based on a formula very similar to that , of the regular tax, according " to the Tax Commission the municipality will receive some $50,000 less from that source. There may be a number of reasons why the Resort Tax returns are lower than the regular sales tax revenues, , Loble said, but not $50,000 1 less. She said that as the city ; goes through the arduous process of analyzing all of Park City's third quarter retail sales on a "business by business" basis, any discrepancies should become be-come evident.