Council delays parks funding discussion, could miss 2006 referendum

By agreeing to hold a workshop in the fall to decide whether to increase the millage rate for park improvements, city councilors have likely postponed a referendum on the issue until November 2007.

One option discussed was an additional tax, which would generate about $1.2 million per 1/10 of a mil and would have a maximum increase of 50 cents per $1,000 in taxable property value. The tax would be allocated toward the city’s quality-of-life projects that have fallen by the wayside due to urgent public works projects. A referendum would be necessary because spending the money would fall outside the city’s spending cap, an annual three percent increase plus a Cost-of-Living Allowance as dictated by the city’s Charter.

Council Chairwoman Terri DiSciullo proposed the plan at the city’s annual Capital Improvement Workshop last month when councilors realized that they did not have enough money to fund several of the $31 million Parks and Recreation and beautification improvements. Increased costs for public works projects that must be completed due to failing infrastructure is sapping money away from the Parks and Recreation Department. In addition, the city must fund all projects under the cap.

“We’ve been robbing Peter to pay Paul—Peter being Parks and (Recreation) and beautification areas,” said councilor Mike Minozzi, an advocate of the plan. However, he objected to abandoning the city’s zero net debt policy and other assumptions staff outlined that would generate an annual revenue of $2.8 million from the increase.

If the public wants quality-of-life projects to be completed, DiSciullo said, they will have to decide whether to allocate money. Otherwise, she continued, Veterans Community Park will never be developed and Mackle Park’s community center will never be expanded.

Councilor Bill Trotter opposed the plan, saying that by approaching the public in this way, the council is abdicating its fiduciary responsibility to manage funds within the cap.

“It’s important for us as a council to manage within the spirit of the cap,” he said. He also pointed out that the council has no specific plans for the new money and no real outline of the actual meeting space that is available within city facilities.

“How many times are we going to have to go through referendum to make these purchases?” asked Councilor Charles Kiester, continuing on to say he is torn on the issue.

Minozzi said the council would be fulfilling its financial responsibility by bringing the problem to the public and asking for help.