The city of Kirkland is moving forward with the possibility of placing a measure on the November ballot to create a Metropolitan Park District (MPD) as a way of funding the construction of the Aquatic and Recreation Community (ARC) Center.

Following the approval of a resolution by the City Council at their April 12 meeting, staff are working to prepare a ballot measure for the November 3, though the council will make a final decision on the matter in August. If approved by residents through a majority vote, the measure would create an MPD. The measure could also set the tax rate, where the boundaries would be located, and where the money would go, or leave it to be worked out later.

From the city’s perspective, an MPD is an ideal way to provide a stable source of funding for the ARC, which is estimated to cost $48-67 million, while allowing flexibility to work out present uncertainties such as the total cost and actual site.

At the council’s April 21 meeting, City Manager Kurt Triplett said that although they have a general estimate for the ARC itself, they are currently looking to purchase private sites, but until an offer is formalized they don’t know what the actual cost will be. Whereas a bond measure would raise a specific amount, an MPD would enable them to raise as much as needed to cover the final bill.

“Right now we’re in a bit of the catch-22 of ‘You need to know your site so you can know your costs,’ but you need to know you have the money to get some of the private sites the council has asked us to look at,” Triplett said. “And no other tool really allows us to do that because to do a bond measure on the ballot, you have to know your cost and your site.”

The resolution declared the council’s preference for a site located somewhere in the Totem Lake Urban Center. Christ’s Church representatives, located at 11725 NE 118th St across from the Kirkland Justice Center, have expressed interest in possibly selling the property, though Triplett said the problem of finding the money to pay for it remains.

Finding a good location for the ARC has been a challenge for the city after community feedback indicated residents wanted the city purchase a private property for the ARC rather than use city-owned land.

When the city looked into siting the ARC at Juanita Beach Park, the idea was met with criticism from Juanita neighborhood residents, including the neighborhood association. Finally, the Parks Board voted to recommend the council drop Juanita Beach Park, as well as the North Kirkland Community Center, from consideration. Days after the parks board vote, a petition was sent to the city with 600 signatures against siting the ARC in Juanita Beach Park. The resolution approved at the April 21 meeting removed the park from the list of potential sites. Parks Director Jennifer Schroeder said an MPD offers further flexibility not just in terms of how much is raised, but where the money is spent. Money raised within the MPD can be spent outside of the park district. Once an MPD is approved, they can set the boundaries to include the entire city, only certain sections, or sections of other cities, too, something not possible with a bond measure.

“Because we are still in this seeking phase… passing a MPD give us that more confirmation that this is a direction that is desired by the community and this council,” she said.

Among other powers, the MPD manages the property owned within the district, with the authority to purchase additional property as well as issue general obligation bonds. As of 2015, there are about 17 MPDs in Washington, according to mrsc.org, a website devoted to local government issues.

In the meantime, the city is still looking for possible partnerships with other cities and community organizations after a recent meeting with the Redmond City Council left them to conclude that it would not be viable due to separate stages of planning, as well as site preferences. A meeting with the Bellevue City Council is scheduled for May 11, and Triplett has said city officials have held informal meetings with representatives from other municipalities.

The Lake Washington School District was originally planned as a significant partner with the city on the ARC, according to Triplett, but its financial involvement was stifled when a $755 million bond measure failed last year.

The meeting with the Redmond City Council highlighted some of the challenges an MPD encompassing two cities might present, such as how to structure the levy rate and whether it should be calculated based on proximity to the site. One Redmond councilmember expressed concern that some residents who live farther away may consider it unfair to pay the same as those who live closer and have better access to the facilities. Under an MPD, the tax rate is the same throughout the entire district.

If a partner was found, the city would most likely maintain its own MPD, where the council acts the governing body, rather than when an MPD includes multiple municipalities and is run by a board of commissioners consisting of representatives of the different councils. Areas outside the MPD could also vote to add themselves to the district, according to Triplett, or another city could create its own MPD and then either one could spend money in the other district if there was a partnership opportunity.

The MPD’s financial versatility has also caused the city to look at the 2012 park levy, which Councilmember Dave Asher expressed interest in having revoked and its projects funded under an MPD if it is approved.

“I think it would be an appropriate thing to do,” he said. “I think the Metropolitan Park District is an excellent vehicle for this. It gives us some flexibility of doing things and growing as the community grows.”

Unlike an MPD, which sets a fixed rate all property owners pay per $1,000 in assessed valuation (AV), the park levy specifically raises $2.35 million annually. The park levy rate is determined by taking the total amount raised and dividing it by the total property value in the city. This rate is applied to every $1,000 of a property’s value. An MPD also has a maximum tax rate of 75 cents per $1,000 of assessed value, while the total amount raised by the park levy can be increased by one percent per year.

Some councilmembers, such as Penny Sweet, however, warned that getting rid of the park levy would add an unnecessary complication as they go out to gain public support for the MPD.

“I think people are confused enough as it is,” she said. “I think it may well take us until August of this year to just get an explanation of the park rather than the combined piece of this.”

It might also generate uncertainty about the fate of specific projects the city committed to funding specifically through the park levy, which does not include the ARC.

“For the first 10 years or so of that originally park levy, it was pretty committed to the list of projects…that was discussed when the park levy was up for a vote,” Councilmember Toby Nixon told the Reporter. “It’s not cast in stone, but I think the council has a commitment to fulfill that project list.”

Nixon said one way to reassure residents would be to allow a public advisory vote on increases in the tax rate.

“It would be up to the board to decide if it is legally binding (the advisory vote) but at least we would have that clear picture,” he said. “That might be one way, for example, to help people understand and trust that the money that the MPD can raised will only be used for broad public support.”

If the council ultimately decides to place the measure on the November ballot, Triplett said they plan community outreach to explain how the MPD would operate and determine what specifics the public want included in the measure, such as a specific tax rate, or whether the details be determined later.One of the main appeals of the MPD, he said, is that it’s probably the only option for the city if the public wants to see them take action within this year.

Asher said at the April 21 meeting that the community’s enthusiasm is “absolutely essentially going forward from here,” telling those who attended the night’s meeting should continue to show up.

“It’s not easy in any community getting something done that’s significant,” he said. “This is significant. This is something that’s bigger than we’ve done in a long time, and we’re going to need the community’s support on this.”