Opponents of Measure 15-214 say former City Councilor Stephen Jensen has misrepresented their stance in these pages

By Ted Hall and Susan Hall, RN

Recently, Stephen Jensen repeatedly misrepresented the viewpoints of supporters of “no” on the food and beverage tax Measure 15-214.

Mr. Jensen appears to have not consulted the “no” campaign’s Save Our Parks (SOP) website that publicly and transparently presents SOP’s viewpoints. Mr. Jensen attempts to sell voters on the nontransparent “yes” position with bogus jargon and ducks addressing the myths that Parks must be held accountable for perpetuating. Go to saveourparks-ashland.org.

SOP opposes increased funding for Ashland Parks & Recreation Department. SOP does support budgeted funding for our parks. Mr. Jensen claims APRC does not want an increase in its budget. APRC’s current budget request is $16,604,660, an increase of 11%. In addition to their annual budget, APRC repeatedly displays a more-than $16 million wish list for capital improvement projects at their meetings. Save Our Parks adopted their name because Ashland needs APRC to focus on maintenance of the 820 acres of parks we already own, not buying more land and building more things to be inadequately maintained.

Voters consistently state they don’t want the degradation of our parks to continue to be ignored. Mr. Jensen conveniently listed the condition of the golf course, vandalism of the park’s restrooms, poor condition of our swimming pool and delinquent trash pickup as some areas Parks fails to address. Mr. Jensen goes on to state: “using this ballot measure to vent your frustration toward Ashland Parks is not an effective use of your vote.” SOP suggests that a “no” vote on Measure 15-214 is a very clear and effective way to send a message to Parks. A “no” vote will tell Parks to focus on maintenance and end their debt-building addiction to buy and build. Save Our Parks believes Parks has had sufficient budgeted funds for some time to correct the deficiencies in park maintenance. Why haven’t they?

Passing Measure 15-214 would change the food and beverage tax to no longer provide funds currently shared by streets and Parks’ maintenance. Instead, it would be given entirely to Parks. Mr. Jensen says voters need not worry about the loss of street funds for maintenance from the food and beverage tax, yet he conveniently fails to mention the street utility fee charged on every meter in Ashland. The franchise fees and utility meter fees are paid 100% by residents and are not shared by visitors. The food and beverage tax was originally championed as a way for the “many visitors” to Ashland to share and pay the cost of the wear and tear to Ashland. Most voters support sharing the cost.

Mr. Jensen claims the tax can only be spent on capital improvement projects and not maintenance. That is false. The definition of capital expenses is “purchase of land, equipment, construction of facilities and maintenance and repair of assets of a greater than one-year life.” The current tax can be used for park maintenance. A “no” vote would continue to allow food and beverage tax funds for park maintenance, as well as for streets.

Mr. Jensen states, “The extension to the year 2040 allows for proper planning and long-term budget alignment.” What does “budget alignment” mean? It means the food and beverage tax duration translates directly to bondable debt. The longer a law has a stipulated tax duration, the more bonds can be generated by the increased accumulation of tax revenues.

Let’s do the math that Mr. Jensen is obscure about. Mr. Jensen says food and beverage tax is $2 million a year. In 2022 it was $2.7 million. The years before the pandemic the food and beverage tax revenue was more than $3 million. Calculate the revenue using the 2023 budget and a value of $2.2 million with a growth factor of 3%. The math for 17 years is conservatively $50 million. This is a big deal! Don’t give away $50 million unless Parks tells you the “project specific” spending plan first. (On the SOP website, read Rep. Zoe Lofgren’s advice).

Mr. Jensen provides misinformation and is not transparent. SOP respects voters by giving them facts with a website they can use to make an informed decision. Mr. Jensen provides false information about food and beverage tax use on maintenance of streets and parks and trivializes continuing it for 17 years. Why doesn’t the “yes” campaign make any mention of the 2040 extension in the Voter’s Pamphlet? The “yes” campaign hopes and expects to slide a huge revenue increase by the voters in a nontransparent manner in this off-year special election.

My advice to voters is the same advice Ashland residents give me at their door. “Don’t change the food and beverage tax. Keep it shared between streets and parks with the tax ending in 2030. There is plenty of time over the next several years to decide about extending the tax or not extending it. The tax’s purpose and use should be appropriately studied before an election.

The only reason to extend a tax long term is for debt. A vote for debt should be well thought out and decided wisely. For what specific purpose are the supporters of this measure asking you to spend your money out to 2040? If you can’t answer that question, vote “no” on Measure 15-214.

Your money, your choice, your vote.

Ballots will be mailed to voters on April 28 and must be returned no later than May 16. Please vote “no” on Measure 15-214.

Ted Hall and Susan Hall, RN, live in Ashland.

Ashland.news welcomes Viewpoint submissions of 500-700 words. Viewpoints may be emailed to [email protected] or submitted through the “Article Submission Form” link at the bottom right corner of the home page. Please include your name and city of residence with your Viewpoint (which will be published) and, in case we have a question, your contact information (which won’t be published unless you say it’s OK).