Ketchum City Council looks more and more like the Los Angeles City Council.
In L.A., "LID" was called "EFID." Additional property taxes are imposed on a subset of property owners to secure bonds for (or otherwise fund) so-called "improvements" that directly or indirectly relate to disproportionately large affordable housing projects that are exempt from density limitations, parking requirements, traffic studies and such.
Perry's work is amazing -- and we are truly fortunate for his articulate voice and deep expertise -- but in my view, he is wrong in one fundamental respect:
This is not just about corporate-welfare recipients and "Aspenization."
It is also about NGOs and craven bureaucrats taking advantage the affordable housing fetish to manipulate clueless elected officials and commandeer municipal and county governments to reshape hapless communities from top to bottom according to their blueprint.
Ketchum is by far the worst, but expect Sun Valley, Hailey and Bellevue to follow suit in short order if something doesn't change soon.
My platform when I ran for Sun Valley City Council in 2023 was "Prevent Park City 2.0." The way things are going, "Park City" would be a good outcome ....
I am a liberal person, but I have to say the ‘affordable housing’ thing around here really throws us liberals off kilter. People are too afraid to point out the impacts of such projects, for fear of seeming like ‘bad people’. As Perry has pointed out before these projects aren’t wrong in and of themselves, but they are in the wrong spots.
None of what you write about is a surprise. You might also add in the costs of infrastructure to support all of the new demands on existing supports. Roads are obvious, as is sewer capacity, and, of course, the limited water supply from the BWR supply.
The irony here is that the very people who do not support the Aspenization of Ketchum will soon be forced to pay for it! Think about that!
I would add to my comment as I see the IME has an article about the "severe drought" in the area, despite the snowfall, which is 120% of average.
So what impact will all the construction and substantially more tourists have upon the aquifer, that is already over committed? Has this issue ever been studied before all the construction was committed to?
I'd like to add a few comments on this. One, the 'average' for snow fall or SWE (Snow water equivalent) is a running 30 year average. It compares how much water is in the snow for today to the last 30 years at this date. Being 2025, the average that the current snowpack is being compared to only goes back 1995. It's a moving target, and with climate change, it makes the number looks inflated.
The Idaho SWE (snow water equivalent) Map is updated everyday. Today, feb 15th, it looks pretty good. However, it could stop snowing for the rest of the winter and we could be at a 75% average by the end of April. Drought indicators are on a temporal scale that is much larger than SWE. Yes, even after a 120% snowfall year, we can be experiencing a drought. It goes into how fast run off is, how fast the aquifers recharge, how much snow is lost to sublimation, ect. We are far from the maximum capacity for the Big Wood River water supply.
I think if we are worried about water supply, we should re-arrange the water-rights in the Valley. I'd choose to let more folks drink water and take showers, than water golf courses in Sun Valley. We could also ban green lawns in august.
You male good pints about the status of surface water. Only apace water is available for a lot of things like snowmaking and irrigation. But the city takes its water from the ground. We use that water, for consumption and irrigation and what is left is returned to the Bigwood. Except for the treated water that is provided to SVC for irrigating the Elkhorn course and to Weyyakin for irrigation. I do not believe they are charged for this based on what Mick told me. The mayor and the city planner have said multiple times that the acquifer is not a limit on development and we have no scarcity of water in the acquifer. Maybe they are right? But I’ve never seen the city make their information on the acquifer status public.
Yes, that is the situation referred to in the recent IME. The solution though, is not to stop watering golf courses (remember that the SVCo is the economic engine for the WRV) as you suggest, rather, the solution is to cease the increased demand on the limited water supply due to construction in Ketchum. Why weren't the water supply limitations considered when all the building permits were issued? Why wasn't it considered when Planning just substantially increased the density with their new master plan?
And the Mayor, who asserted that there was "plenty of water"? Was this the same Mayor that stated that Ketchum did not have a parking problem?
I asked the Mayor this question today at a KBAC meeting. He assured me we “are using less water this year than we have in the past” according to the city we don’t need to worry about water and we have plenty of it!
How does the Mayor know the water usage? What experts has the City Council used to determine the capacity of the aquifer? Fact is, water supply has not been a factor in any of the Council's decisions or in City Planning....
I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that the water is not just for our use, but necessary for the cities and agricultural lands to our south including Lincoln and Gooding Counties.
That is correct. There is a very arcane system in Idaho as to owning/assigning water rights. There is a constant tensions when downstream folks demand their share, theoretically causing upstream users, with lower priority water rights, to reduce or cease using water! Ketchum needs to study and document how we will all be assured of access to water, despite all the new construction.
Once again, the council is being deceptive - on the flyer it states the Meeting are Feb. 18 12noon On the Website it says 2pm - they have done this often. Sure looks like they really Do NOT want Public Input. Time for DOGE in Ketchum!
Hi Allison...the LID workshops are being held Feb. 18th at 12pm at City Hall and Feb. 19th at 5:00pm at City Hall. The regularly scheduled KURA meeting (held the 3rd Monday of each month) was scheduled to be held Feb. 17th, but was pushed to the 18th because of the holiday, and ultimately pushed to Feb. 24th at 2:00pm at City Hall to allow time for feedback from the workshops to be assessed. The Feb. 24th meeting will be important for public participation to hear the KURA Board's recommendations on LID as part of a funding model for adequate parking as part of the proposed housing development.
At some point the actions of the City Council will be perceived as 'willful negligence' and/or 'malfeasance' with respect to how taxes are collected and used. There must be some remedy that can be pursued in the courts. At the very least this might give you some time, if not more agency. SLOW.IT.DOWN.
"In politics, being deceived is no excuse" (Leszek Kolakowski)
Put aside for a moment the fundamental problem at the heart of this mess, which is that too many STR’s have proliferated due to market demand; crucially, this is due to restrictive state laws and regressive, anachronistic tax policies.
That leaves the process by which local money is collected and spent. The process is both out of order and out of sync with the principles of good governance. It's opposed by and contrary to the interests of enough taxpayers that it deserves to be challenged in the courts. Perry Boyle is skillfully tracking the costs vs. the returns. That's your ammunition.
For the readers of this blog. According to Suzanne Frick from Kura, 83% support the parking garage and project at Washington Street. I suggest everyone inundate her email box.
"I’m not sure where you are getting your information. Based on the Nov-Jan community survey about the project (attached), which had the highest participation of any city survey, 83.4% of the respondents strongly support the project if it includes a public parking structure. The Ketchum Business Advisory Committee (KBAC) also supports the project if it includes public parking. At this time, the project includes a public parking structure. Efforts are underway to figure out how to pay for the public structure. The new survey will provide additional community input on the parking structure funding options.
All actions and decisions about the project are taking place at public meetings open and accessible to the public.
Hi Sue...here is a link to the results of the first survey that KURA did regarding gauging interest on moving forward with a LID as part of a funding model for a parking garage as part of the proposed housing development on 1st and Washington. This link will show the questions asked and a breakout of the results received:
There is no 1:1 correlation to rising assessed value and rising property taxes. You fail to recognize several other factors that figure into how property taxes are calculated. Your statement may be true when you look at it year-to-year in a vacuum. For example, it's pretty safe to say the last 5 years saw huge increases in assessed values across Blaine County. My home's assessed value went up 85% over the last 5 years and my property taxes on average stayed flat over the same time period. Don't believe me or think it's an aberration? Look at your assessed value of your own home Perry over the last 5 years. Your property assessed value has increased nearly 53%, yet your property taxes went down 13% over the same time period. Anyone reading this should do the same analysis on their own home and they may be surprised that rising assessed value doesn't necessarily translate into rising property taxes when you look at the average over time.
That’s a great point. So how do a citiy’s aggregate property taxes rise if individual property taxes remain flat while the assessed value goes up? Doesn’t that have to come from new development? Thanks for the insight.
Ketchum City Council looks more and more like the Los Angeles City Council.
In L.A., "LID" was called "EFID." Additional property taxes are imposed on a subset of property owners to secure bonds for (or otherwise fund) so-called "improvements" that directly or indirectly relate to disproportionately large affordable housing projects that are exempt from density limitations, parking requirements, traffic studies and such.
Perry's work is amazing -- and we are truly fortunate for his articulate voice and deep expertise -- but in my view, he is wrong in one fundamental respect:
This is not just about corporate-welfare recipients and "Aspenization."
It is also about NGOs and craven bureaucrats taking advantage the affordable housing fetish to manipulate clueless elected officials and commandeer municipal and county governments to reshape hapless communities from top to bottom according to their blueprint.
Ketchum is by far the worst, but expect Sun Valley, Hailey and Bellevue to follow suit in short order if something doesn't change soon.
My platform when I ran for Sun Valley City Council in 2023 was "Prevent Park City 2.0." The way things are going, "Park City" would be a good outcome ....
I am a liberal person, but I have to say the ‘affordable housing’ thing around here really throws us liberals off kilter. People are too afraid to point out the impacts of such projects, for fear of seeming like ‘bad people’. As Perry has pointed out before these projects aren’t wrong in and of themselves, but they are in the wrong spots.
None of what you write about is a surprise. You might also add in the costs of infrastructure to support all of the new demands on existing supports. Roads are obvious, as is sewer capacity, and, of course, the limited water supply from the BWR supply.
The irony here is that the very people who do not support the Aspenization of Ketchum will soon be forced to pay for it! Think about that!
I would add to my comment as I see the IME has an article about the "severe drought" in the area, despite the snowfall, which is 120% of average.
So what impact will all the construction and substantially more tourists have upon the aquifer, that is already over committed? Has this issue ever been studied before all the construction was committed to?
Howdy,
I'd like to add a few comments on this. One, the 'average' for snow fall or SWE (Snow water equivalent) is a running 30 year average. It compares how much water is in the snow for today to the last 30 years at this date. Being 2025, the average that the current snowpack is being compared to only goes back 1995. It's a moving target, and with climate change, it makes the number looks inflated.
The Idaho SWE (snow water equivalent) Map is updated everyday. Today, feb 15th, it looks pretty good. However, it could stop snowing for the rest of the winter and we could be at a 75% average by the end of April. Drought indicators are on a temporal scale that is much larger than SWE. Yes, even after a 120% snowfall year, we can be experiencing a drought. It goes into how fast run off is, how fast the aquifers recharge, how much snow is lost to sublimation, ect. We are far from the maximum capacity for the Big Wood River water supply.
I think if we are worried about water supply, we should re-arrange the water-rights in the Valley. I'd choose to let more folks drink water and take showers, than water golf courses in Sun Valley. We could also ban green lawns in august.
Food for thought.
You male good pints about the status of surface water. Only apace water is available for a lot of things like snowmaking and irrigation. But the city takes its water from the ground. We use that water, for consumption and irrigation and what is left is returned to the Bigwood. Except for the treated water that is provided to SVC for irrigating the Elkhorn course and to Weyyakin for irrigation. I do not believe they are charged for this based on what Mick told me. The mayor and the city planner have said multiple times that the acquifer is not a limit on development and we have no scarcity of water in the acquifer. Maybe they are right? But I’ve never seen the city make their information on the acquifer status public.
Yes, that is the situation referred to in the recent IME. The solution though, is not to stop watering golf courses (remember that the SVCo is the economic engine for the WRV) as you suggest, rather, the solution is to cease the increased demand on the limited water supply due to construction in Ketchum. Why weren't the water supply limitations considered when all the building permits were issued? Why wasn't it considered when Planning just substantially increased the density with their new master plan?
And the Mayor, who asserted that there was "plenty of water"? Was this the same Mayor that stated that Ketchum did not have a parking problem?
Wake up folks, before it's too late.
I asked the Mayor this question today at a KBAC meeting. He assured me we “are using less water this year than we have in the past” according to the city we don’t need to worry about water and we have plenty of it!
How does the Mayor know the water usage? What experts has the City Council used to determine the capacity of the aquifer? Fact is, water supply has not been a factor in any of the Council's decisions or in City Planning....
That was my thought .I guess this would be a question for Ketchum City Water?
I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that the water is not just for our use, but necessary for the cities and agricultural lands to our south including Lincoln and Gooding Counties.
That is correct. There is a very arcane system in Idaho as to owning/assigning water rights. There is a constant tensions when downstream folks demand their share, theoretically causing upstream users, with lower priority water rights, to reduce or cease using water! Ketchum needs to study and document how we will all be assured of access to water, despite all the new construction.
Once again, the council is being deceptive - on the flyer it states the Meeting are Feb. 18 12noon On the Website it says 2pm - they have done this often. Sure looks like they really Do NOT want Public Input. Time for DOGE in Ketchum!
Hi Allison...the LID workshops are being held Feb. 18th at 12pm at City Hall and Feb. 19th at 5:00pm at City Hall. The regularly scheduled KURA meeting (held the 3rd Monday of each month) was scheduled to be held Feb. 17th, but was pushed to the 18th because of the holiday, and ultimately pushed to Feb. 24th at 2:00pm at City Hall to allow time for feedback from the workshops to be assessed. The Feb. 24th meeting will be important for public participation to hear the KURA Board's recommendations on LID as part of a funding model for adequate parking as part of the proposed housing development.
Please consider attending one of the workshops and filling out the LID assessment survey, found here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GSQJN28
At some point the actions of the City Council will be perceived as 'willful negligence' and/or 'malfeasance' with respect to how taxes are collected and used. There must be some remedy that can be pursued in the courts. At the very least this might give you some time, if not more agency. SLOW.IT.DOWN.
"In politics, being deceived is no excuse" (Leszek Kolakowski)
Put aside for a moment the fundamental problem at the heart of this mess, which is that too many STR’s have proliferated due to market demand; crucially, this is due to restrictive state laws and regressive, anachronistic tax policies.
That leaves the process by which local money is collected and spent. The process is both out of order and out of sync with the principles of good governance. It's opposed by and contrary to the interests of enough taxpayers that it deserves to be challenged in the courts. Perry Boyle is skillfully tracking the costs vs. the returns. That's your ammunition.
For the readers of this blog. According to Suzanne Frick from Kura, 83% support the parking garage and project at Washington Street. I suggest everyone inundate her email box.
"I’m not sure where you are getting your information. Based on the Nov-Jan community survey about the project (attached), which had the highest participation of any city survey, 83.4% of the respondents strongly support the project if it includes a public parking structure. The Ketchum Business Advisory Committee (KBAC) also supports the project if it includes public parking. At this time, the project includes a public parking structure. Efforts are underway to figure out how to pay for the public structure. The new survey will provide additional community input on the parking structure funding options.
All actions and decisions about the project are taking place at public meetings open and accessible to the public.
Happy to answer any questions you may have.
Suzanne
SUZANNE FRICK | KETCHUM URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY"
I'd like to see how the question was actually worded and what information was provided to put the project in context.
Hi Sue...here is a link to the results of the first survey that KURA did regarding gauging interest on moving forward with a LID as part of a funding model for a parking garage as part of the proposed housing development on 1st and Washington. This link will show the questions asked and a breakout of the results received:
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ketchid-meet-d08b35eb7a12453bb8852100a0f1fbca/ITEM-Attachment-001-e2ae0cebd243477ea167e081e6e56e73.pdf
Here is a link to the current, second survey KURA is running. This will be open through Feb. 23rd (we think). Please consider completing the survey:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GSQJN28
Here is a link to information about the Washington St. project as a whole, and the timeline of how we got to where we are:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/e00b1604a5d349e6b5c139551ac5df6b
There are two upcoming LID workshops...one on Feb. 18th at 12pm at City Hall and one on Feb. 19th at 5:00pm at City Hall.
Thank you!
KBAC
There is no 1:1 correlation to rising assessed value and rising property taxes. You fail to recognize several other factors that figure into how property taxes are calculated. Your statement may be true when you look at it year-to-year in a vacuum. For example, it's pretty safe to say the last 5 years saw huge increases in assessed values across Blaine County. My home's assessed value went up 85% over the last 5 years and my property taxes on average stayed flat over the same time period. Don't believe me or think it's an aberration? Look at your assessed value of your own home Perry over the last 5 years. Your property assessed value has increased nearly 53%, yet your property taxes went down 13% over the same time period. Anyone reading this should do the same analysis on their own home and they may be surprised that rising assessed value doesn't necessarily translate into rising property taxes when you look at the average over time.
That’s a great point. So how do a citiy’s aggregate property taxes rise if individual property taxes remain flat while the assessed value goes up? Doesn’t that have to come from new development? Thanks for the insight.