San Jose continues to discover tax or bond measure to handle parks backlog

With San Jose already dealing with a considerable upkeep backlog and uneven fiscal waters, polling information reveals that assist for a tax or bond measure that would supply an infusion of recent funds for metropolis parks is lagging, prompting metropolis leaders to contemplate altering their method to influence extra residents to buy-in.

Associated Articles

The place will the homeless in Columbus Park go when San Jose’s largest encampment is cleared for revitalization challenge?

Tordillos barely widens result in enter runoff for San Jose Metropolis Council seat

Newest vote tally reveals one other swing within the San Jose District 3 Metropolis Council race

Newest Line: A very good week for Loren Taylor, a foul week for Omar Torres

San Jose particular election may see recount as one vote separates candidates vying for runoff

Metropolis officers explored putting a brand new parcel tax on the November poll final 12 months however in the end withdrew it after a good portion of the neighborhood felt financially squeezed and fears surfaced that the town’s income initiative would fail.

Whereas latest polling confirmed a parcel tax or bond measure each hovering across the 50% mark — falling properly beneath the two-thirds threshold wanted — San Jose has not given up hope and will borrow from different cities’ profitable playbooks to garner assist on defending a few of its most treasured belongings.

“Trust in government is an issue and that is obviously not improving as we all know. All you have to do is turn on the TV and watch your national politics,” Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Companies Director Jon Cicirelli mentioned.

Regardless of the recognition of the town’s park system, a brand new report reveals that San Jose’s per capita funding in upkeep ranks among the many lowest within the state and cities of the same measurement. The town’s parks employees can be 19% smaller than it was in 2002-2003, regardless of the park system’s acreage rising by 22%.

“It’s clear that the existing status quo when it comes to how we are funding our parks in the city of San Jose is not sustainable,” District 5 Metropolis Councilmember Peter Ortiz mentioned. “It’s definitely not equitable, with a staggering $554.3 million in deferred maintenance and unfunded infrastructure needs.”

This 12 months, San Jose set a $183 million whole working price range for its park system — which incorporates $65.4 million for upkeep and operations — that’s funded by growth affect charges, a portion of building and conveyance taxes, the town’s normal fund, presents, grants and partnerships.

Nevertheless, most of these funding sources have confronted important challenges lately, stopping San Jose from making inroads on its dilapidated parks.

For instance, building and conveyance taxes, generated by new building permits and actual property transactions exceeding $100, have declined over the previous few years as a result of inflation and excessive rates of interest.

Over the previous decade, the overwhelming majority of growth charges have been generated in District 3 — which incorporates downtown San Jose — and District 6, which incorporates neighborhoods stretching from Mineta Worldwide Airport all the way down to Willow Glen. Resulting from restrictions, nonetheless, these funds can’t be spent in different components of the town. Districts 3 and 6 generated $80.9 million and $53.4 million, respectively, over that interval, whereas all different districts acquired between $1 million and $7.7 million.

Cicirelli additionally famous that just a few metropolis tasks even have been “DOGE’d,” referencing the motion within the federal authorities to cancel funding within the identify of waste, fraud or inefficiency.

He added that the town has compounded its points by not updating its park charges since 2017, therefore, offering a built-in low cost for land worth, and providing substantial charge reductions to builders.

In recent times, for instance, the town has authorized charge reductions for downtown high-rises, multi-family tasks in North San Jose, and 50% reductions for tasks that supply on-site recreation and inexpensive housing developments. Altogether, the mixed charge reductions may rise to a 75% discount.

Though most tasks acquired a mean lower of 20-30%, it has led some officers to consider the town wants better fairness, which might drive higher buy-in.

“A great example of the status quo is, for example, cities giving developers breaks on fees that are intended to fund city infrastructure, while the needs of our everyday residents are pushed aside to say to residents that we will make the money back in the future that’s nothing more than trickle-down economics,” Ortiz mentioned. “We saw what trickle-down economics did to our entire country, especially to the working class, which was absolutely nothing. And as a result, we have a park system that is expected to serve more people with far less money.”

Cicirelli acknowledged that whereas the town plans to conduct extra polling within the fall and early 2026, it’ll additionally undertake a sturdy neighborhood engagement course of to tell its method and draw on the most effective features of profitable parks campaigns launched in San Diego and Los Angeles County previously decade.

San Diego, for instance, created a “one city, one park” system that allowed it to bypass the event charge problem San Jose faces, enabling it to distribute funds higher.

Cicirelli famous that Los Angeles County handed a profitable measure in 2016, two years after one failed on the poll field, by reaching out to residents in every district and explicitly telling them “what would change or be better if a ballot measure were passed.” He hoped it will enhance the ballot outcomes as a result of residents may then see the worth of the proposal.

In the meantime, advocates have voiced assist for the town’s need to enhance its parks.

In noting that the town had not handed the same income measure since 2000, advocates described the present funding system as “archaic, inequitable, and inadequate,” whereas touting the advantages of funding.

“Parks are important to the well-being of the community, but parks that are not maintained have the opposite effect,” park advocate Allie Victorine mentioned. “Neighborhoods without parks do not have the same sense of community and health that other neighborhoods do.”