The November 4th Special Election ballot has just one question for Portland voters centered on renewing and increasing a five-year parks levy first approved in 2020. Measure 26-260 asks property taxpayers to renew the Portland Parks and Recreation (PP&R) supplemental funding source at $1.40 per $1,000 of assessed value from the previous 80 cents per $1,000. Portlanders tend to vote in favor of supporting parks. However, a recent Portland Auditor’s Office report casts doubt on the Parks Bureau’s fiscal management to date, raising concern among some about increasing park funding taxes without a sustainable budget plan.

The report outlines several issues driving PP&R’s budgetary shortfall, including unfunded pet projects from past City Council members and politicized management under the last form of government. However, the report identified the expansion of Portland’s Park system, including new locations and amenities, as a substantial fiscal burden for the Bureau. Building new parks without first securing a maintenance funding source exceeded PP&R’s share of the City’s General Fund, leaving the Parks Bureau with few options other than reducing services or closing locations.

Five years ago, during the pandemic, voters approved the parks levy to support services provided by PP&R after the Bureau cut costs during a 2019 $6 million shortfall. Those funds kept the parks’ programs open but did not address a substantial maintenance backlog. All the while, during its budgetary crunch, PP&R had a sizable source of money from developer fees. However, State and City laws prohibit the use of those funds for maintenance activities. That created a situation in which PP&R could add assets to the parks system without the funding to maintain them.

Current District 3 Councilor Steve Novick also served previously on City Council under the Commissioner form of government during a pivotal time for parks, when its overbuilding phase ramped up due to City leadership’s increasing System Development Charges (SDCs) collected for parks from fees charged to development projects. His history with PP&R’s funding leads him to believe that Portlanders should approve 26-260 to give the current City Council time to rebalance park funding. “It would be rather absurd to take it as reason to vote against the levy because of what the auditor pointed out, which is true, we’ve been building new parks without the money to fix the old ones,” explained Novick.

Councilor Novick believes the PP&R leadership has taken the blame for a systems failure that predates the 2019 budget shortfall. “Five years previously, in 2015, when I was on the council, we voted to increase parks SDCs; [Commissioner Dan] Saltzman and I voted no,” recalled Novick. They expressed concern about its impact on housing costs. A concern supported by the current City Council, which recently suspended SDCs temporarily on new residential projects. Novick noted that at the time, he was also concerned that PP&R would build facilities they could not maintain without additional funding that the former City Leadership did not provide. “The attitude of the council at the time was build baby build and don’t really worry about the crumbling assets.”

In Novick’s opinion, the current City Council can address PP&R funding in a more sustainable way, but needs to stabilize the decline before it starts making hard choices. “I think arguing that adopting the levy defers tough decisions is sort of fair, but we shouldn’t be making those tough decisions at the point of a gun in the context of having to come up with a budget that savages the parks system,” said Novick.

Conversations about park funding took center stage at City Hall during this last budget cycle, where PP&R competed for General Fund money alongside other large line items, such as police, fire, and homeless services. Some of the possibilities City leaders envision require changes to how the Bureau uses SDCs. “One thing that we’re going to do is go to the legislature and ask them to change the SDC statute so that SDCs can be used to repair existing structures, not just build new ones,” explained Novick. This change would allow PP&R to use development-fee-generated funds to maintain existing parks. This approach is favorable, as infill housing development brings more people into existing neighborhoods that may have languishing parks in need of attention to support new residents.

Another potential funding source comes from outside contributions. “I also think that there is a lot more thought now about trying to get some private money into the parks. The example that everybody always brings up is Central Park in New York City, [which is not funded by] City tax dollars. There’s a consortium of foundations and rich people to take care of Central Park,” said Novick. “I think that’s a conversation we need to have with our money elite in the city. Maybe there’s Nike branding or whatever all over the parks. Personally, I would live with that.”

Councilor Novick also noted that the city may need to issue a parks bond to address the backlog of repairs and reduce the operating expenses currently burdened by the system’s condition. “Hopefully, we can do the minor maintenance with this levy. That will prevent us getting to major maintenance costs in some facilities,” remarked Novick. He worries that without Ballot Measure 26-260, the City Council will have to make drastic cuts to parks without the time to plan spending reductions strategically. “What we learned [during the last City budget cycle] is that pretty much everything that parks does is really important to a bunch of people, and if the levy fails, then we’re gonna have to prepare a budget for next year which assumes we’re making massive cuts to parks.”

Ballot Measure 26-260 text says the median homeowner would pay $310 per year if the levy passes, which is just under $26 per month, and represents an $11 increase over what current property taxpayers have contributed to parks since the 2020 levy’s approval. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. on November 4th at a county drop site (multco.us/dropsites) or postmarked in the US mail system by November 4th.

Montavilla News does not endorse candidates or ballot measures.