HomeMy WebLinkAbout022225 email - Survey QuestionsALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear Commissioners Eisenhour, Brotherton, and Dudley-Nollette,
As related to the currently circulating Jefferson County Aquatic Recreation Survey, I have been thinking about supplemental survey questions that would add more significant informative
bearing on the decisions related to building a new mid-county aquatic facility, and substantive data necessary to make an informed decision for the formation of the Public Facilities
District (PFD) taxing district as the primary source of funding/ revenue for building, operations, and maintenance of the proposed new aquatic facility.
I am concerned that the current survey does not provide the necessary data you will need to make a truly informed decision, one way or the other. It has been stated by members of the
BOCC that the types of informative survey questions which I am suggesting here would skew and/ or bias the results of the survey in some way in order to force a specific outcome. I
honestly feel that the same could be said for how the current survey is presented. But these arguments, either way, are not productive. What is needed for the next steps of critical
and impactful decision making is a data-set that provides open, clear, and substantive information in order for you to proceed effectively, and in the best interests of the citizens
of Jefferson County. Therefore, I believe the following questions should have been/ should be included as part of the currently circulating survey.
Here are my supplemental survey questions:
1.Assuming a new mid-county aquatic facility would cost $14 - $23 million ($30 - $47 million over the course of a 30-year bond), would you support a PFD forming to impose a 0.2% increase
in sales tax county-wide (excluding groceries and prescriptions) in order to build, operate, and maintain this aquatic facility?
__Yes __No
2. Additional philanthropic/ private funding will be needed in order to assist with the new aquatic facility's ongoing annual operations and maintenance. This would be facilitated through
a public-private partnership between the newly formed PFD and the Jefferson Aquatic Coalition (JAC). The JAC, operating as a 501(C)(3) nonprofit corporation, would be the primary sponsor
of the ongoing fundraising activities. How much might you be willing to donate, on an annual basis, towards the fundraising goals that would be necessary and set annually by the JAC
(estimated to be between $200k - $400k annually) in order to maintain the ongoing operations and maintenance of the proposed new facility?
__$5 __$10 __$20 __$50 __$100 __$500 __$1,000 __$5,000 __$10,000 __$ (other amount)
3. In order to stay within the responsible and efficient new aquatic facility budget of between $14 - $23 million dollars needed for new construction, the aquatic facility would likely
have the following amenities: 2 lap pool tanks built to high school competition standards, one with cool water, and one with warm water and with shallow to deep ends, a warm water spa/
jacuzzi, locker rooms, accessible bathrooms and shower facilities, administrative and mechanical spaces, adequate and accessible drive-up approaches and accessible and general parking,
etc. What other facility amenities would be important to you to have, understanding that these added amenities would increase the total cost needed to build the facility?
List desired additional amenities here: _____________________________________________________________________________
4. The list of responsibilities that we ask our local government agencies to perform acting as the best stewards of our tax monies is long, important, and should be as equitably facilitated
as possible. Please rank the following list of community/ taxpayer funded responsibilities in the order of priority you feel is best to meet the needs of our community, priority 1 being
the most important priority, to priority 7 (or 8) being least important priority:
__Aquatic activities funding, i.e. possible new aquatic facility construction with ongoing annual operations and maintenance
__Public School funding
__Road maintenance and accessibility improvement funding
__Affordable Housing/ shelter housing/ transitional housing funding
__Public Safety, i.e. Law enforcement and fire and rescue funding
__Mental Health Treatment and Substance Abuse Treatment funding
__Job Growth and Economic Development funding
__Other (Please identify here): ___________________________________)
Supplemental survey questions notes, clarifications, and comments:
For the purposes of question #1, I used a 30-year, 5.5% interest rate for my calculation. However, we have no idea what the new PFD's bond rating will be, but it is possible that the
interest rate would be much higher as the new PFD will have no experience/ bond rating. I am also not sure if the lender will require that collateral will have to come from Jefferson
County, and I am not sure what the county's credit/ bond rating/ capacity is currently.
For question #2, the basis for the JAC fundraising efforts was made on what I felt was an appropriate amount considering the $400k of discontinued annual financial support currently
provided by the City of Port Townsend for the Mountain View Pool for operations and maintenance.
As I stated earlier, from the BOCC's past comments regarding survey questions like this, it has been suggested that these types of survey questions are not appropriate as they are designed
to skew the outcome in a biased direction. I honestly don't see how these questions would bias the survey results. These are important informative questions that would produce responses
that would not only help guide the BOCC going forward, but would also inform the public and would be a good indicator of what our community honestly feels about building a new mid-county
aquatic facility, and for possible PFD formation, especially before we spend any more taxpayer's money on the new aquatic facility and PFD as are currently proposed.
It is my understanding that the proposed PFD board/ directors will be selected by the BOCC with two positions from District 1, two positions from District 2, two from District 3, and
I assume, one at-large position for a total of a seven member PFD board. If the PFD is formed, who would be holding the un-elected PFD directors/ board members accountable for how they
would potentially spend the taxpayer's money? Would the PFD be completely autonomous? The new Transportation Benefit District (TBD) is run by the BOCC acting as a proxy, and if the
TBD/ BOCC were to repeatedly make poor and costly decisions on transportation related spending issues, we, as voters, could act accordingly and seek new representation. As I see it,
the taxpayers would have little leverage on the PFD board members/ directors regarding their general decision making and spending authority.
I would encourage you, as the BOCC, acting on behalf of all the citizens of Jefferson County, to carefully consider these supplemental survey questions, and to consider what the responses
to these questions might have been. I do not see that you can possibly proceed with the current path of voting for the formation of a PFD without considering the responses from the
public to these types of questions. Therefore, I would strongly urge you to, in whatever way is practical, disseminate these supplemental survey questions to the public in order to
solicit an informed taxpayer/ voter response.
Thank you for your continued hard work and for your thoughtful consideration of these issues.
Mark L Grant
Jefferson County