[MissoulaGov] SID Deferrment

[Jim McGrath]

Thanks for the clarification.

But it seems that Dave is discussing something different. 

"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."

This is like the downtown street cleaning district which is assessed
each year - your definition of levy, I guess. But how would a city-wide
district levy be different than a city-wide tax levy? 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

From: Ed Childers [mailto:echilders at ci.missoula.mt.us] 
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2009 10:05 AM
To: David Strohmaier
Cc: Jim McGrath; 'Bob Jaffe'; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] SID Deferrment

 

My nickel's worth:
    A Special Improvement District: bonds are sold up front to finance
improvements; property owners in the defined District Area repay the
loan (bonds) over a predetermined time period; they pay interest on the
loan (bonds) at a predetermined interest rate.
    A Levy: an annual charge to property owners in a defined area. The
amount is set periodically (in my experience, annually) based either on
some anticipated benefit to the owners or on benefit already delivered.
    Some combination of the two is possible; for instance there was a
proposal to sell Bonds to finance improvements at the Fort Missoula
Park, and charge an annual levy that would have repaid the loan (Bonds)
and provided ongoing maintenance.
    
    Not surprisingly, when we start discussing a proposal for citywide
financing of local projects such as sidewalks that have historically
been financed locally, people who have already paid for their own local
improvements object to paying for other people's. By the same token,
when we have a proposal for local financing of what appears to some to
have been financed citywide, people object.

---ed



Ed Childers
echilders at ci.missoula.mt.us
 
406-728-3751
406-546-7681 (cell)
 
www.ci.missoula.mt.us
 



David Strohmaier wrote: 

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.

 



________________________________



 
_______________________________________________
-----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------
 
Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
posts to this list may be entered into the public record. 
Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org 
List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090215/17a1652e/attachment.htm>