[MissoulaGov] SID Deferrment

[David Strohmaier]

I think this is somewhat a matter of semantics, because for all intents and
purposes a city-wide street, park (you name it) maintenance district is very
much akin to a city-wide SID with the exception being that it would not
sunset after a specified period of time (e.g., 20 years) but would be
envisioned as a burden that the entire community would bear as long as there
are streets and sidewalks and trails to maintain.

 

Happy Valentine's Day

 

From: Jim McGrath [mailto:jmcgrath at missoulahousing.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 10:30 PM
To: David Strohmaier; Bob Jaffe; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: RE: [MissoulaGov] SID Deferrment

 

Interesting idea.
Having, I hope, made it clear that I myself never discovered a "best" fair
way of handling these things, I cannot say I'm a fan of either SIDs or
general fund approaches.
But to play devil's advocate some more, how in your mind do you distinguish
between "taxes" --a general levee creating a general fund-- and a "city wide
SID"? how is a district-of-the-whole NOT a general levee or tax?


-----Original Message-----
From: David Strohmaier [mailto:dstrohmaier at msn.com]
Sent: Fri 2/13/2009 5:25 PM
To: Jim McGrath; Bob Jaffe; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: RE: [MissoulaGov] SID Deferrment


Jim,

One possibility, should the City of Missoula ever seriously entertain the
thought of city-wide street/sidewalk pr parks maintenance districts, would
be for a certain percentage of the revenue generated from the district to go
for tax relief to those who are still paying on existing SIDs (i.e., helping
pay down their SIDs). This would do little to help the folks who have
already paid off their SID, but it would help offset any real or perceived
inequities between those who are currently saddled with SIDs and those
across the city who would benefit from a city-wide assessment vis-a-vis more
equitable distribution of the tax burden.

Dave

Dave Strohmaier
City Council, Ward 1
508 E. Pine Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 327-8911, home
(406) 721-1958, office



Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:48:22 -0700From: jmcgrath at missoulahousing.orgTo:
BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us; missoulagov at cmslists.comSubject: Re: [MissoulaGov]
SID Deferrment





I'm not sure what you mean by defer?
The city has allowed low-income seniors, for example, to defer the SID,
which basically makes it due upon sale of the property. In fact we did that
for the fellow in question. (by the way it is quite probably the easiest
bureaucratic process I have ever seen!) it's a great program.

My comment was that if we decide that sidewalks, for example, or curbs or
parks or street lights are common goods and should not be paid for by SID,
are we going to PAY BACK or REMOVE -not defer-the cost experienced by others
up till now?
Obviously not.
But would it be fair to those who have paid SIDs (or have them on their
property as a deferred lien) to ALSO pay for someone else's common public
good?





From: Bob Jaffe [mailto:BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us] Sent: Friday, February 13,
2009 2:24 PMTo: Jim McGrath; missoulagov at cmslists.comSubject: SID Deferrment



Jim,

I asked Brentt to look into the issue of people who have been assessed in
the past being allowed to defer the balance of their SID.  He did some
research and determined that the language of the ordinance does not preclude
this.  There are some qualification guidelines but it is available to
people.



bob







From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Jim McGrathSent: Fri
2/6/2009 7:03 AMTo: Jed Taylor; missoulagov at cmslists.comSubject: 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.
Messages and attachments sent to or from this e-mail account pertaining to
City business may be considered public or private records depending on the
message content. The City is often required by law to provide city records
to individuals requesting records, some of which are not public records and
have limited scope of distribution pursuant to state law. The City is
required by law to protect private, confidential information. This message
is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are
not the intended recipient of this transmission, please notify the sender
immediately, do not forward the message to anyone, and delete all copies.
Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090214/d2e0a769/attachment.htm>