Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2014 12 10

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes November 12th, 2014 Page3of8 Mike suggested that the City explore the idea of a smaller Parks and Open Space maintenance /operation fund that wouldn't sunset. The Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition Fund's annual revenue does not cover the current budget and the planned acquisition reserve. Jeff suggested that such a tax might well be necessary and popular (and citizens have come to him asking for expanded recreation facilities), but he suspects it would need to be a bottom -up, citizen -lead initiative to succeed. Jeff asked whether the Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition Fund has the ability to borrow, which would add another mechanism to assure an adequate fund balance for properties that come onto market. Malcolm said he believed so. Linda asked how long it would take for the fund to borrow money /issue bonds, and whether it could be done fast enough to pay a potential land- seller. Malcolm thought it could be done in less than 6 months, given previous City experiences. Linda pointed out that, though properties taxes are citizens' least popular taxation mechanism, property values are greatly enhanced by the City's Open Space, so an Open Space property tax may make sense to support acquisition. Missy pointed out an expense budget line item in the table on pg. 6 of the packet, labeled "Open Space Property/Planning," that hasn't been spent for 15 years. She asked what this line item represents and whether we are neglecting it. Ember answered by saying this planning was currently being bundled into the City's Open Space Master Planning line item and is identified for 2016. Tom thanked Malcolm and Ember for putting together this packet and complimented the draft policy suggestions and the work that went into being transparent about accounting. He thought it was clear and comprehensive and that continuing to report on separate Open Space and Parks expenditures and budgets was critical. Tom suggested that perhaps the City needs to find a revenue stream to fund Parks and Recreation. The Parks operation budget used to come from the general fund, and hasn't really been replaced, so now it leans on the Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition Fund. Mike commented that all the Parks demands on the Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition Fund limit the Open Space program's ability to expand land management and programming. Tom asked whether Malcolm saw the current 25:75 (Open Space: Parks) spending ratio continuing into the future. Malcolm thought that with land purchases that ratio could change dramatically, but otherwise the current spending balance would probably not change. Tom and Helen suggested that the language of the ballot initiative for the Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition Fund emphasizes open space (and trails, buffers, wetlands, etc.) over Parks, which are mentioned last on the list. Tom felt that the expenditure balance should better reflect the priority language of the ballot. Helen felt that the tax was "sold on Open Space" with Parks tucked in and we should prioritize, increase and protect the Open Space budget. Joe pointed out that the Parks staff also have to manage and maintain smaller chunks of land that are neither Parks nor Open Space. Malcolm asked the Board to suggest language for the City Council to prioritize Open Space spending (referred to in the meeting as the "draft policy "). 4