Laserfiche WebLink
raise $2 million (see attachment). Through the structuring of the bond, we <br />believe that this number can be reduced to $29 per year based on some <br />assumptions for future growth in the community. <br /> <br />Decision Resources has noted that the Survey implies that $29 is the upper <br />limit that the public will support for outdoor recreation issues. Everyone <br />originally thought that we could get both outdoor recreation and a modest <br />pool (for under $1 million) for about $29 per household. However, this was <br />based on the net tax capacity figures. Based on market value information, a <br />combined pool and an outdoor recreation issue approaches $50 per household <br />and this is far too much. The public simply is not willing to support an <br />outdoor recreation and pool issue that approaches $50 per year (please see <br />attached comments from Bill Morris, Decision Resources, Ltd., regarding the <br />new tax figures). <br /> <br />In the initial meeting between the Commission and Decision Resources, <br />discussion took place regarding the support for the outdoor pool. At that <br />meeting, it was suggested that the city could structure an "if..., then..." type <br />of ballot. By this, Bill Morris meant that "if' the outdoor recreation issue was <br />approved, "then" the vote on the second question regarding the pool would be <br />counted. However, "if' the outdoor recreation issue failed, "then" the vote on <br />the pool would not even be considered. Subsequent conversations with Bill <br />have indicated that this is a common approach for school referendums, but <br />we have yet to see a city pursue this type of questioning on a ballot. <br />Additionally, bond consultant, Jim O'Meara, of Briggs & Morgan, who must <br />structure and approve the bond question(s), has also not seen this type of <br />approach at a municipal level. If we could find a municipal example, we <br />would have a better chance of convincing Jim that this is an appropriate <br />approach, but to date we have yet to find one. <br /> <br />Assuming the "if..., then..." two question approach is not valid, then the city <br />has a very difficult situation if the pool is to be on the ballot. The difficulty <br />relates to: <br /> <br />1.) <br /> <br />2.) <br /> <br />Whether or not the proposal should have one question on <br />outdoor recreation and a second question combining outdoor <br />recreation and the pool; or <br />only one question simply dealing with both outdoor recreation <br />and the pool; or <br />whether or not there should be two separate questions, one <br />dealing only with the pool and another dealing only with <br />outdoor recreation. <br /> <br /> <br />