Last fall the ball got rolling against funding a library in Superior in part because some residents insisted the community would be better served by a Rec Center. Turns out Superior residents are no more interested in paying for a library than they are a Rec Center and the Town Board killed plans to ask for a bond vote this fall that would have paid for it.
Not only are people not interested in paying a new tax -58% opposed both of two proposals in the survey - they actually aren't interested period. Of more than 4,000 households in town, with surveys mailed to each known address in the community, only 618 responses were received. That's just a little more than the number of people showing up for movies this summer in the Rock Creek HOA. With the HOA dues and relative amenities provided by HOAs, it appears Superior residents aren't looking for too much more from the town govt.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
This is not surprising. Superior was not really a town before Rock Creek was developed. In name only.
No downtown. A smattering of buildings. Consequently, no town identity.
Currently, there are no primary employers in town. Virtually everyone commutes to somewhere else for work. Again, no identity.
Many, when asked, say they live in Rock Creek rather than Superior.
A perfect example of a bedroom community. It's a tough sell to get these people to pay for creation of an identity.
No wonder Superior is fully on board with the revenue sharing concept.
Interesting conclusion, Dan. Folks don't want a rec center because of their HOA amenities? Of course they are paying for that already.
Could it be that by now those interested in rec center activities are already members of a private one? (YMCA?) Or that they aren't interested in what a rec center has to offer so why pay for something they aren't going to use?
Residents refusing to raise taxes on something they don't believe in.
Their mayor pro tem told our council Superior was flush for 5 years. Yet they would have to raise taxes for this.
Lafayette subsidizes its rec center to the tune of around $1,600,000 per year. This is an estimate since the city gov refuses to put the numbers together, not a mention in the city budget book. And it faces heavy competition from the private health clubs and the soon to be open Erie rec center. The rec center is paid for out of sales tax by the way. (Ever wonder why we have to borrow to pay for road repaving?)
Read the ballot language that voters approved for the Lafayette rec center. You will be surprised.
Ah yes, the Rec Center in the red - this has always been the case and I think it bears repeating when people ask for money for X other city project. Presenting the trade-offs is what a good council will do. We don't have money for X, but look how much we put into Y, and here's why "Y" is a great thing for town.
'J' is good too.
The city made a Faustian bargain by insisting on HOA's to pay for their infrastructure - HOA's maintain open space and city easements. Homeowners pay a staggering amount of money for redundancy - management, insurances, and so forth. This was why we formed GOVERNMENTS - to run infrastructure. Folks are out of money - HOA's get the first of it - your home serves as collateral.
Rec Centers are a 'public good' which means that are done in recognition of the fact that the citizens consider them to be important enough that they are willing for there to be a subsidy. When I first got on council both Kerry and myself questioned the size of the subsidy. I vividly remember the former rec center director, during an orientation meeting with him, telling three of us that council had passed an ordinance that allowed him to run in the red 20-40%. three things ultimately came out of that. First, the old Parks &Rec department (which included Parks, Rec Center, Open Space, Golf Course , Sr. Center) was reorganized after into two separate departments and the Sr. Center went under the library. Second council sunset that ordinance to level the playing field between departments.
Thirdly the Golf Course debt was reorganized to a longer period of time. Due to the outstanding efforts of the two new directors, the rec center subsidy is below 20%, and the Golf Course is making money. Considering the cost I am glad we are not faced with building a new rec center today. Ours is a jewel that needs to be preserved. We will never be able to run it 'for profit' unless we raise the fees substantially which the public would not accept. But improvements have been made that have substantially reduced that subsidy.
Post a Comment