V2N12: KURA Says We Want a Housing Project with a Garage
Their methods are UNETHICAL
This week, KURA will tell us that the people of Ketchum have spoken and that we want a housing project with a garage. We don’t—they know we don’t—but they have a survey that says we do!
It’s the City’s typically slimy way of manipulating outcomes. You conduct a survey asking, “Do you want your public housing project with a garage or without a garage?” When 84% of the respondents say “with a garage,” you say, “There is overwhelming public support for a housing project with a garage.”
This is, of course, not true.
KURA never asked the respondents, “Do you want to keep things the way they are?” which is what most people want. But these unelected people, accountable to the Mayor for their positions, do what they have been appointed to do: impose a public housing project on us.
Gary Lipton of KURA has repeatedly said at public meetings that KURA will build this housing project regardless of what the people of Ketchum want. He doesn’t live in Ketchum.
This is how KURA operates under the leadership of Mr. Bradshaw, Ms. Frick and Ms. Scoville. It is unethical.
Two City Council members and five commissioners, picked by the Mayor, are happy to participate in this farce. Where are their ethics?
So, given that KURA confidently states that we want a housing project with a garage, their next step is manipulating us into taxing ourselves to pay for it—with another survey!
You get the options of “do you want a garage if it means we won’t fix the roads” and “which LID do you want to pay for the garage? " It's slimy, slimy, slimy.
But to ensure they are “listening” to us, they are holding two open houses this week. This is the same kind of farce the City used with its one and done open house on the Comp Plan.
KURA has already decided to do the LID—that’s clear from their survey. Now they will give us limited options on the LID and then get the Council to impose it. Remember, two KURA members are two of the Council Troika.
This will break new ground for Ketchum. It will impose a new tax on residents without a referendum. Think about it. We must have a referendum to tax tourists (and ourselves) with a LOT. To tax locals for a housing project they don’t want on that location, the Council just waves its magic wand.
This is not democracy.
I just submitted the following letter to all members of the council:
Mayor and Councilmembers,
Regarding ALL the proposed housing and parking projects, it's become quite clear that you are not reading any of your letters nor any of the results of your (poorly designed) public feedback surveys. It is clear that you are severely out of touch with your own constituents. I read all the letters in the agenda packets, clearly you don't. Have you tuned into the ever growing list of commenters on Perry Boyle's substack? Or read any of the editorials in the Mountain Express? I highly suggest you do. The list of frustrated and concerned citizens is growing. People are deeply upset.
Out of frustration, people are organizing a centralized social media site to voice concern and take action.
Currently you are protecting yourselves from public opinion by virtue of the deeply flawed design of your city council structure.
At this point, you are guilty of both willful negligence and willful ignorance.
You continue to IMPOSE a never ending series of misguided housing and parking projects that NO ONE WANTS, and that will permanently destroy the town's liveability, viability and character.
Thank you to Tripp Hutchinson who seems to be the only one who 'gets it' and has the integrity to stand up to all this nonsense. Tripp: I don't know how you can stand to sit through those city council meetings. It has to be exceedingly frustrating.
To Neil and others: Start reading your letters. Listen to your people. Do your job.
-Annie Nelson
I attended KURA's meeting regarding the LID at Ketchum City Hall today and think there is a good chance of stopping this project.
In broad strokes, the City Council, KURA, etc. want to get the LID in place by Fall 2025 so they can get final approval for the housing project and subterranean parking by the end of 2025 and begin construction in 2026.
Basically, the City Council is trying to cobble together a makeshift LID so it does not have to bother with voter approval the general bond that would otherwise be required to pay for subterranean parking. The City Council can impose a LID on its own, but general bonds require approval by 66 2/3% of voters.
At first, it looked like the City would only have to raise $8.5 million through the LID for the subterranean parking project. They thought they could do that through just 2 LID zones -- one within 2 blocks of the Project (Zone 1) and the second 2-4 blocks from the Project (Zone 2).
It now appears that they need $13 million from the LID to install subterranean parking because funding the housing project has shifted around a bit.
Thus, their new plan is to apply the LID to all of Ketchum through tiered assessments in 4 zones. Zone 4 is residences on the outskirts of Ketchum. Zone 3 is mostly residences that are closer to City Center (Zone 1) than the residences in Zone 4 are.
I think the per square foot assessment for Zone 1 (City Center) is something like 20x the assessment for Zone 4.
For property-based assessments such as these, the Constitution requires that there be an "essential nexus" between the Project and the property that is being assessed and that the amount of the assessment be "roughly proportionate" to the benefit created by the Project for the assessed property.
There are several potential problems for the proposed LID, under this framework. For example:
-- It does not distinguish between commercial properties and residential properties (which will presumably be affected differently).
-- It does not distinguish among types of commercial uses (i.e., high traffic operations (bars) vs. low traffic operations (law offices)).
-- It is based on lot size (as opposed square footage of revenue generating space).
-- It does not distinguish between developed land and undeveloped land
-- It does not account for the fact that residents in the immediate vicinity of the parking structure get no benefit at all yet pay the largest assessment on a per square foot basis.
-- It piecemeals the project (looking at the purported benefits of parking without the likely burdens of additional housing units) and fails to account for the fact that the site in question currently provides surface parking
Facts like these might also raise equal protection issues.
And, generally speaking, LIDs are narrowly drawn and supported by businesses within LID boundaries. A citywide LID opposed by the very property owners it is supposed to benefit is unusual.
As noted above, the City is plainly trying to use its putative LID powers to avoid having to get voter approval for a bond.
They might have gotten away with it if the project costs were not so high and they could limit LID assessments to businesses in the "City Center," so to speak, but for the reasons set forth above (i.e. tiered assessments covering residences, businesses and undeveloped land throughout all of Ketchum), I think there is a good chance a court would find that the proposed LID is an unlawful attempt to circumvent voter-approval requirements for new municipal debt. Needless to say, more research (including fact development and a review of state law) in required, but that is my initial sense.
For what it's worth, I got the impression that the mayor and City staff, etc. know they are vulnerable and indicated that the entire build might have to be scrapped if they could not figure out a parking solution. And a KURA Board member told me he did not expect the housing project or the parking project to get approved.
In sum, I think there is a good chance of stopping this if there is sufficient opposition. I know it's not easy but there is reason to mobilize.