An official vote is scheduled for the next business meeting
By Morgan Rothborne, Ashland.news
A $5 monthly fee to cover funding gaps and prevent large budget cuts to Ashland Parks & Recreation was tentatively approved at a joint Wednesday meeting between APRC and Ashland City Council.
The study session could not conclude in a formal vote like a business meeting, but through a communal verbal agreement, city councilors directed staff to work on implementing a $5 monthly parks fee on utility bills. Staff were also asked to bring back the fee for a vote at the next business meeting with the expectation of reevaluating parks funding and the fee after the biennium budget process is complete.
Councilors Eric Hansen, Jeff Dahle, Bob Kaplan and Mayor Tonya Graham all voiced approval. Councilor Dylan Bloom was not present, and Councilor Gina DuQuenne voiced opposition.
Additional fees have already been raised for the city’s ratepayers amid overall economic pressure, DuQuenne said. Councilor Hansen said that based on his experience as a small business owner coupled with his second round of city budgeting, he opposed the temporary nature of the fee.
“Beyond Santa Claus and some other lies I tell my family, I don’t lie and I’m not going to lie to myself here. We’re in a long term budget crisis and we need to look at solutions, and I believe this is a solution that’s part of our future,” he said.
Budget Shortfall
In the face of state property tax restrictions, the city has attempted to find alternative sources of revenue for the general fund. These have included the Transient Lodging Tax, the Food and Beverage Tax, and parks fees such as facility rentals, said Ashland’s city manager Sabrina Cotta.
“But none of those are full cost recovery, and none are intended to fully fund a department,” Cotta said.
The city did not raise rates for utility bills or franchise fees from 2017 to 2024, creating a growing gap in revenue and expenses, she said. The city is working to become “more streamlined and innovative,” but “we are people heavy in what we do, and people continue to be the biggest expense.”
The city may have also over-projected revenue in the previous biennium, she said. Personnel costs are rising sharply in double digit percentages.
“This will not be the last discussion, “Cotta said.” The point is this is a systemic issue, if we are going to provide this level of service, then we need an avenue for revenue to provide this level of service,”
Recently approved increases to the wildfire and public safety fees on monthly utility bills have added an additional $2.2 million in revenue for fire and police. Cotta said her proposal for a parks fee was an option to create revenue for parks.
“Economic development is a priority of the community,” she said. “Parks are an economic driver and parks are a livability factor.”
DuQuenne asked about selling parks land and creating “systemic change.” Parks & Recreation Director Rocky Houston responded, saying state law precludes spending sales of park land on anything but capital expenses. The sale of land would ease pressure on the cost of maintenance overall, he said.
APRD Commissioner Dan Weiner asked about limitations for the Food and Beverage tax. Houston said the previous referendum to change the use of the tax was not successful and the sunset date is approaching in 2030. Cotta said the tax produces around $4 million per biennium while parks is at a budget of around $14.4 per biennium.
Commissioner Justin Adams and Weiner both voiced support for the proposed parks fee but referred to it as a “band-aid,” that should be removed and replaced as better solutions are found.
Assessment of the funding situation
With 811 acres of parkland, the department spends about 139,343 combined man hours annually to maintain it, Houston said.
In the ongoing PROS plan process and additional analysis, the intention is to develop a refined understanding of the department’s resources and the public’s priorities then align those two realities as much as possible, Houston said. The department will also continue seeking out new forms of revenue — including sponsorships, private-public partnerships or tax levies — while also trimming costs in creative ways such as a “trash can diet” in parks or reduced irrigation in some areas. Officials will also look at divesting of assets.
“All of these don’t happen today, don’t happen tomorrow; this is a lot of work to figure out which way a lot of those things go,” Houston said.
He presented corrected numbers for how high of a monthly fee would be required to prevent budget cuts to programs such as the splash pad or the Daniel Meyer Pool. The full list of proposed cuts was previously reported by Ashland.news. Houston apologized for the original incorrect numbers, which were presented at the April 15 meeting.
A 5$ parks fee would produce $1.1 million in 18 months, while a fee as high as $7 could generate $1.5 million in the same time span, according to the provided chart.
Using a calculator on his tablet, Kaplan said he could see the $5 fee could generate the necessary income over 24 months rather than a $6.50 fee for 18 months.
Dahle voiced wariness of “business as usual,” and the fee becoming permanent out of accidental complacency, but ultimately suggested approval of the fee and revisiting a time limit after the biennium budget process is complete. Councilors and Mayor Tonya Graham agreed to the suggestion. DuQuenne declined to comment on a time limit “on principle” as she opposed the fee entirely.
“We can’t just keep putting band-aids on like these fees; we need to transition beyond short term fixes to larger strategic ideas,” APRD Commission Chair Jim Bachman said. “We will continue to try to find efficiencies, that’s just good management but we’re pretty down to the bone.”
Email Ashland.news reporter Morgan Rothborne at [email protected].
