The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-22-18 Public Comment - T. Thatcher - Parks and Rec District CommentsFrom:Chris Mehl To:Agenda Subject:FW: Parks and Rec District Comments Date:Sunday, July 22, 2018 9:23:57 PM please add to public comment, thanks Chris Mehl Bozeman Deputy Mayor cmehl@bozeman.net 406.581.4992 ________________________________________ From: Tony Thatcher [tony@mountainwhimsy.com] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2018 11:58 AM To: Chris Mehl Cc: Mitchell Overton; Brian Close Subject: Parks and Rec District Comments Bozeman Commissioners, As Vice Chair of the City's Recreation and Parks Advisory Board and chair of the Parks and Trails District Subcommittee, I have been spending a bit of time considering the potential Parks and Trails District Special Assessment, what it means to the Department, the City, and its citizens. Commissioner Mehl is already aware, this topic has not sat well with me. Though a Parks and Trails District has been on the "to do" list for the City for years, the RPAB has not been engaged with it until recently. I am pleased that we are now engaged in the discussions as a board and are able to present opinions and insight for the City to consider. That said, the following comments do not come from RPAB. They are mine. Though some have been expressed to me by others on the Board. Please take them as insight from both a citizen, and an informed RPAB member. If the City is having trouble meeting its current obligations for Parks and Rec (note the challenge of hiring and maintaining seasonal and full time staff), then how can taking on more make sense? The city's budget is getting capped due to State legislative rules, so moving budget items into Special Assessments is merely a way of having property owners continue to foot the bill of the City's growth. Yes, it would stabilize and ensure funding or Parks and Rec, but at what cost? Perhaps I should have made a counter motion at the last meeting to not support any of the proposed levels of service. I realize that that discussion should have come a couple of years ago, but the opportunity to discuss it was never available at RPAB in my 2.5 years on the board. Here's a few issues that I feel should be considered when the Commission considers the level of service AND when considering whether to do a ballot or protest approach to implementing the District: 1) What is the minimum level of service the City can get away with to provide for parks and rec without degrading the current user's experience? The growth of the City has obviously not paid for itself. Those of us who have been here for a long time (23 years for myself) have paid for the growth over and over again with new school levees, special assessments, and various bonds. Our "Most Livable Place" is now becoming UN-livable for many who find the rising cost of Bozeman (home prices, rent, taxes tied to the rising cost of property, etc) far outpacing income. The "new" money coming into Bozeman is not in line with the people and community who put Bozeman on the map. 2) I don't agree with the double taxation argument. When people purchase a home, they have a choice as to what neighborhood they want to live in. They chose that home based on a number of factors - cost, location, and perhaps because they like the amenities and are willing to pay to support them. If they don't like paying HOA fees that cover park maintenance, then move into a different neighborhood. Apparently there are plenty of HOAs out there who no longer collect fees. 3) I don't necessarily agree with the argument that people are demanding better parks and trails. As we've heard at our meetings, there are plenty of HOAs that are dysfunctional and unwilling to maintain their own little patch of neighborhood park. Perhaps because they can't afford to do so, perhaps because they don't care. I don't doubt that you hear this from people. My experience as I talk to people, which I actively try to do in order to help make decisions, is that there is a large but relatively silent portion of the population who don't pay attention to the inner workings of the City's budget, as they are mostly just trying to get by. Many of these people rent, so are being hit with higher rents as the owners pass on the increased costs to their tenants. They are just trying to get by, are largely blind to the anything parks/trail related, and don't have the time to get involved with local policy issues. Those with the time to get involved are generally better off financially, and thus able absorb fee increases without a second thought. 4) I agree, it's difficult to have completely fair taxation. But to base the Special Assessment on parcel size will hit those who are lucky enough to be a homeowner, but are barely scratching by, a lot harder than a wealthy person who also lives on an similar-sized lot. And the argument that our taxes are actually very low in comparison to other communities is a false argument. You have to consider cost of living and wages if you are making that sort of argument. Even the City can't afford to pay its Parks and Rec staff enough to keep them here! Taxing those individuals more won't make living in Bozeman any more affordable. 5) As was mentioned at the RPAB meeting, getting public support for a Parks and Trails District Special Assessment is about optics. I, for one, and in conversations with others about this, would be be upset if this was created by decree and left to protest. I realize that it costs more to do a vote, but piggy back it on another ballot if necessary. Buy in is more important than protest. The City has a duty to protect the most vulnerable of its citizens. If this Special Assessment was for providing affordable housing, mental health services, affordable health coverage, etc - truly essential needs, on par with police and fire - I wouldn't hesitate to support it. But I'm having a hard time raising taxes on a section of the population that is already cash-strapped. Just in today's Chronicle, the proposed Law and Justice Center would cost the average property owner an additional $121. This on top of the High School, elementary schools, and County Open Space tax increases. As a fellow board member commented to me, it would be irresponsible for the city "becoming part of the problem through additional burden." This Parks and Trails District would be one more burden on property owners who are rapidly reaching the breaking point. I was happy to see that the City hired a lobbyist for the next legislative session. More attention and effort needs to be going into the systemic issues that are challenging our city and creating disparity. Making sure that everyone has a nice park next door is not going to make the city any more "livable". So, as a middle ground, I'd like to propose the following. Scrap the Bronze/Silver/Gold approach to a special assessment. The immediate issue is the backlog of deferred maintenance. If a Special Assessment is used, then simply address the backlog. Chisel away at it over the 10 yr time frame that the Study shows, then ensure that it does not creep back up. The status-quo of our parks is really not terrible. We have some great parks out there. And some key parks definitely need more attention. But until we can get some sort of local sales tax to offset the burden of growth and taxes, make a choice that is has the least impact to the most vulnerable. Sincerely, Tony Thatcher -- Tony Thatcher tony@mountainwhimsy.com<mailto:tony@mountainwhimsy.com> mwcustomguitars.com<http://mwcustomguitars.com> 406-581-0847