[MissoulaGov] Park rebuild project

[Bob Jaffe]

The question about why are we using an SID for this park was discussed
exhaustively when we approved the SID. The short answer is that it is
the only way the project will get done in the next ten to twenty years.
Rebuilding Pineview would have to wait in the queue to reach the top of
the priority list for a very long time to get paid for from the general
fund park budget. The neighbors took a more proactive approach and
organized an SID. But there were many people who did not think it was
fair to be assessed for the park.

 

Brent has indicated that this will be pooled with other bonds. I'm
trying to get clarification if that is already taken into account on the
budgeted numbers.

 

 

 

 

From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com
[mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Jim McGrath
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 7:33 AM
To: Jim McGrath; Jed Taylor; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Park rebuild project

 

Having said all that, I also wonder if the city couldn't figure out a
way to reduce the financing cost. I recall when I was first on council,
the city figured out that they could save a lot by combining many small
projects into one large bond.

One thing about having served on council as a relatively young man is
that I can be the "old retired councilman" for many years to come. :-)


-----Original Message-----
From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Jim McGrath
Sent: Fri 2/6/2009 7:03 AM
To: Jed Taylor; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Park rebuild project

I'm sure others will weigh in on this, because it is a thorny question.
In fact, curiously philosophical for city council work.

I think all council members grapple with the question (I know I did).
What is the "fair" way to fund projects like this? I tended to lean
toward community-wide, in part so that all parts of the community could
afford infrastructure.

The fact is that would result in many fewer projects -- some years none
because all the resources would go to maintaining existing crumbling
infrastructure. The sources of community-wide funding are real estate
taxes and gas tax. Both may be declining. Property taxes are
constrained. These capital projects are very expensive, too. In the case
of parks, you can't use gas tax. I pretty much oppose the idea of park
districts, but the amount of money devoted to park maintenance and
development is dismal.

Plus there is history. The city has used the SID tool for many years. I
know an elderly disabled fellow on the Northside who happened to have a
corner house and was assessed a gigantic SID for curb and sidewalk. It
presented a huge hardship and it is still in place. Are you interested
in giving relief to past property owners who agreed by the petition
process to have that assessment?

Given that we are doing SID's, the financing tool is only an option for
the property owner. They can pay it or they can finance it themselves I
suppose or they can take advantage of the city's financing. The amounts
and timelines are such that the city can't "just pay for" and bank the
neighbors. (There may be legal problems with that idea, too, I don't
know).

I don't have any answers for these questions. I do know all the
approaches to it have minuses as well as pluses.

-----Original Message-----
From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Jed Taylor
Sent: Thu 2/5/2009 11:47 PM
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Park rebuild project

Of course, this begs the question as to why the city is using a SID for
something that belongs to the entire city.  Shouldn't the entire city
pitch
in when something needs built, even though any given project
disproportionately benefits a certain area?  Isn't that the whole
concept of
having a city, as opposed to a collection of neighborhoods where some
can
afford projects others can't?  Will those paying for this park be able
to
keep those who didn't pay for it out?



  



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090207/ac548347/attachment.htm>