A “special” meeting
Did you try the rub? Not yet? That’s alright. There’s time.
So let’s get back to this week’s meeting of the Missoula City Council. By the way, those folks will get together this afternoon to talk “special districts” again, and it should be interesting to see if the discussion is constructive.
One cool thing about Monday’s meeting is the dozen or so people who showed up to comment. The last few years, you could have heard a flea fart when the Mayor John Engen called for comment on the budget. Silence.
Not Monday, though. There was even a smattering of applause, which the mayor doesn’t like ’cause people are supposed to stay orderly, but it does show you the way some folks are feeling about things.
The clapping came after Linda Frey spoke, and she slammed the administration for fiscal irresponsibility, naming SIDs, cost overruns on pools, the Play Ball deal, and probably some other things.
“You are driving out the middle classes, the retired and the young,” Frey said. “Is that the city you want to create?”
That’s when Trish Auras in the audience broke into applause.
Frey also said the cap on property taxes was put there for a reason — ’cause voters want it there. The special districts circumvent the cap, she said, especially since growth has been negative.
“This resolution may be technically legal, but it clearly violates the will of the voters,” Frey said.
John Dilley said it’s no surprise the city doesn’t have enough money. It sequesters money in urban renewal districts, gifts dollars to private enterprises, and even wastes water and leaves on lights along the riverfront trail even in broad daylight.
“This administration says it doesn’t have enough money,” Dilley said. “Well, of course it doesn’t have enough.”
Those weren’t the only comments in opposition, but I bet you’ll hear something different next week. I’m thinking those folks who support the districts will show up strong next Monday.
– Keila Szpaller
July 14th, 2010 at 11:52 am
Who’s supporting the districts and what are the districts for?
July 14th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_9f523c1c-8cac-11df-b918-001cc4c03286.html
See a copy of Sunday’s print Missoulian for more.
July 14th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Oh ok. so instead of parks or road maintenance districts or special improvement districts, they’re using special parks and road districts. Genius. Let the sausage grinding continue.
July 14th, 2010 at 9:54 pm
So, “John Dilley said it’s no surprise the city doesn’t have enough money. It sequesters money in urban renewal districts, gifts dollars to private enterprises, and even wastes water and leaves on lights along the riverfront trail even in broad daylight.”
I dunno about the lights along the trail, but those other things seem newsworthy. I do wonder how much gets (as a % of total City taxes) siphoned off to URDs, the MRA, the MCDC, Playball, Missoula Convention & Visitors Bureau, and proxies for city government.
July 15th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Siphoned off? Urban renewal districts and their financing are terribly complicated but here are some facts:
1. MRA’s budget goes through the City Budgeting process because its funds flow through City accounts and has the oversight of the City Council and Administration. It is not a proxy for City government–it is part of City government.
2. The County’s increment district goes through the County budget so it has the oversight of the County Commissioners.
3. The increment that goes into the urban renewal district comes, for the most part, from new commercial investment which means that it is a measure of its direct or indirect success at encouraging private investment.
4. Over the years, MRA has partnered with the City, the County, the State, the School District, the private sector and non-profits to make important improvements to our community that we all enjoy and benefit from. Included in that are streets, sidewalks, bridges, improvements to schools, parks, life safety code upgrades in public and private buildings, affordable housing, sewers, etc.
5. A five person citizen Board oversees the MRA’s activities and holds its staff accountable.
July 15th, 2010 at 4:15 pm
I agree MRA does not siphon off money. The increment wouldn’t have been there had no investment been made. At the TIF sunset, the added value gets assessed for the general fund at a much higher level then before the TIF.
I still think the special districts law went beyond the scope of its intention to consolidate previously scattered districts by adding “local improvement districts.” Lame, lame, lame.