Sales tax option for pool...

[PAL]

Exactly. Well stated.

[dhop]

While both sales taxes and property taxes are regressive, you have a bit of a choice in how much sales tax you want to pay by reducing your shopping expenses. If you don’t pay your property tax, you lose your property. The sales tax option is far less expensive than the property tax option, as tourist $ pay a substantial portion of the tax used to fund the operations of the pool. We have to pay additional city sales taxes whenever we travel to Seattle and other places in the state. It is only fitting that we return the favor.
Like Chris said, the 0.2% sales tax is a nominal charge that amounts to very little money. Instead of paying $100 at the restaurant, you pay $100.20. It is much fairer than property taxes. Why should one group of people (property owners) pay for all the expenses of the pool? FOP’s motto is “a pool for everyone”, so everyone should help pay the costs.

[PAL]

Yes, of course, no tax on food. Or even medications.

[pasayten]

No tax on food... That makes it less regressive...

[Fun CH]

I find it humorous that a sales tax option to fund a pool would also be a regressive tax. Arguably more regressive than a property tax would be, in the sense that lower-income people would pay a higher proportion of their income on such a sales tax.

The Math of what Ray is proposing with a .2% sales tax increase, doesn't amount to much money. Far less than MPD property taxes or an equal rent increase.

For example a $200,000 home* at 75 cents per thousand of assessed value equals $150 in increased property taxes per year.

A low income family making $25,000 per year, even if they spent that entire amount on taxable goods it would only be an additional $50.00 in sales taxes at a .2% sales tax increase.

So way less regressive.

*" The median home sold price in Methow Valley was $626,000 in October 2023, up 6.1% from last year, and the median price per square foot was $375."

Or an additional $470.00 in MPD property taxes at max regular levy

[PAL]

Buy less stuff. Again, it is the use of the word regressive that depends on who the tax is hitting. It's not "regressive" to non property owners, because guess what, they don't own property!
Maybe there could be a cut-off, then. Like an exemption, if they made below a certain amount. Not a whole lot of people would qualify. Just the truly needy, how about.
I know I go on about property owners only paying for a pool. Except of course, we are so sure rents would be increased. That could also be considered regressive and could harm lower income people, ultimately.
As I say, they could buy less stuff. Or we all could buy less stuff. Uh oh, our ecomony might crumble if everyone did that.

[mister_coffee]

I find it humorous that a sales tax option to fund a pool would also be a regressive tax. Arguably more regressive than a property tax would be, in the sense that lower-income people would pay a higher proportion of their income on such a sales tax.

[PAL]

Yep,agree with you on this one Jingles.

[Jingles]

In other words, as major of Twisp he will be pursuing a Metropolitan Park District despite the wishes of the majority Voters who opposed this MPD prop twice.

Pursuing a MPD again if prop 1 fails is consistent with my conversation with Justin Porter prior to the Nov. election.

Would like to remind folks that the mayor's of Winthrop and Twisp are not supposed to be the deciders on what happens or is done in either of these two town, that responsibility belongs to the town Councils. The mayor'sare only suppose to vote on things when there is a tie in the votes of the council members.
Yes I know the mayor's like to think (using naval terminology ) they are the captain of the ship, but in reality they are just the mascots.
I believe we need to approach the council members verses the mayor's and remind them of their responsibilities and duties when presenting the sales tax option for funding a pool, be it theWagner pool or a new pool.. Although IMO most of the council members are mere yes men to the mayor's
And until the residents of each town stand up and make the council members do what they are suppose to do and hold them accountable when they don't do their jobs things will not change

[Fun CH]

A lot of folks certainly did vote against the MPD, but also with the vision that a new more reasonable pool plan would be sought.

We don't know the number of people who voted against the MPD "with the vision that a new more reasonable pool plan would be sought." Like I said, that wasn't on the ballot.

And your words regarding MPD and what the Town of Twisp will do is just your speculation... Nothing more.

Also it does not have to be a county wide sales tax add on... Each town can use the sales tax add on individually. That is what this entire thread is about.

Yes, speculation but based on my talk with Justin about trying again with a more polished MPD message if prop 1 failed.

Do you really believe the FOP wants to give up on obtaining the money and power that a MPD provides? They have already shown that they really don't care about the will of the majority of our community. They even told us that they had overwhelming Community support for a Mega MAC which was proven to be a untrue.

I suggested doing the sales tax increase county wide because the OCCs represent those of us who live outside the town limits.

I have no desire to pay property taxes to support tourist infrastructure that the towns of Winthrop or Twisp desire. That's their business, not mine.

[PAL]

Yes, one way or another we will pay for it. But no "burden" should be put on just one group. Even if I never would use the facility and at this point it would not be a year round pool, I would not object paying some into the kitty, as long as everyone pays. That would be the sales tax option.

[SOulman]

I believe the community needs to recognize that a pool will be largely self-funded. A sales tax option has merit, particularly for operational costs.

There are public and private grant sources out there, as well as philanthropic money. But the bigger the project, the less likely any single source of money will cover building costs. Managing multiple funding sources with different criteria and timelines makes a project more complicated and risky.

The community will succeed when we temper our dreams for a fancy facility with the reality of what people are willing to pay. Some people are willing to pay through a property tax, some through a sales tax, some through user fees. If it's a community priority, we will pay for it.

Steve Oulman

[PAL]

I will say it again. The Twisp Capital Facilities Budget Plan has for 2026, $7million 5 delineated for a pool. And in the chart it says where this funding would come from. It says, RCO/Local. Local being who knows what. They probably don't know either at this point.
They may not try for an MPD again, it fell so flat, but could go for another type of recreation district. But the sales tax option could work plus with RCO funding. They said over and over how regressive a sales tax option is and that the property tax option was not. Was not for whom? It is regressive for property owners, that's who. So, the sales tax option may be regressive in one sense, but everyone pays, including the tourists that come here.
I do not want to see any kind of Rec District that imposes taxes on the property owners. I think that came through, once again, loud and clear.

[pasayten]

We voted against the formation of MPD.

A lot of folks certainly did vote against the MPD, but also with the vision that a new more reasonable pool plan would be sought. Don't get too entrained in your use of "we". And your words regarding MPD and what the Town of Twisp will do is just your speculation... Nothing more.

Also it does not have to be a county wide sales tax add on... Each town can use the sales tax add on individually. That is what this entire thread is about.

RCW 35.57 allows towns to create their own local Public Facilities Districts (PFD) and initiate a 0.2% sales tax addon to support projects. Pasco successfully recently did this to build a new pool facility.

A funding option for a Twisp pool project would be for having Winthrop and Twisp each create a separate Public Facilities District with a 0.2% sales tax addon. Then combine the funds thru an interlocal agreement to support a regional pool. I believe there is also a $10mil total facility value requirement. This could be accomplished by adding the library and skating rink into the PFD which would also help support of these important local regional facilities.

[Fun CH]

What's changed? Do you now trust these people?

I will work with them to seek a sales tax option. Or a Tonasket Pool option.

Remember that our campaign did say Yes to a new plan for the pool. That involves working with the Mayor of Twisp.

yes to a new pool plan was not voted on, it wasn't on the ballet. We voted against the formation of MPD.

The Town of Twisp will stick to their guns that cite their research that supports a MPD as being the only sustainable option for a pool.

The Town of twisp will propose their own Metropolitan Park District that they will be able to place that on the ballot without the citizen petition.

They will down size the pool plan and tax money ask which is what they tried to do during their campaign political narrative change. But it will still be a MPD with all the harm that brings to low income families, it just won't look so greedy.

I guess by trying to find a sales solution with the town of Twisp at least you can say you tried.

Is there a way for the county to slightly raise the sales tax to benefit all county wide recreational projects?

Meanwhile, I will be speaking with an attorney about a you to forever ban the school district from having a Metropolitan Park District.

Metropolitan Park districts never used to apply to populations under 10,000 people.

[just-jim]

.
To expand on what S Oulman said, below….

WA State RCO has at least 5 Grant programs that can fund swimming pools and their planning. https://rco.wa.gov/

Community Outdoor Athletic Facilities, LWCF, Planning for Rec Access, Local Parks Mtce, and Youth Athletic Facilities all offer some grants - with and without a required local $ match on the part of the town.

I haven’t worked with RCO in quite a while, so I’ve no idea how competitive they are nowdays. I suspect competition is pretty high. The town will be aware of the grants; Kurt Danison, their planner is very familiar with RCO grants.

These funds, or their predecessors, did the previous ‘rehab’ of the pool in the late 1990s and again about 2012-ish(?). Those projects were in the neighborhood of $300K++, I recall.
.

[pasayten]

What's changed? Do you now trust these people?

I will work with them to seek a sales tax option. Or a Tonasket Pool option.

Remember that our campaign did say Yes to a new plan for the pool. That involves working with the Mayor of Twisp.

[Fun CH]

In other words, as major of Twisp he will be pursuing a Metropolitan Park District despite the wishes of the majority Voters who opposed this MPD prop twice.

Pursuing a MPD again if prop 1 fails is consistent with my conversation with Justin Porter prior to the Nov. election.

I did not see that in his response... Your comment is premature and purely speculative... Lets wait and see how this plays out.

BTW, my conversations with Justin prior to the election was that he would have preferred a sales tax option.

Here is how I reported my farmers market conversation with Justin here.

"If this ballot measure fails and Justin thinks it will, they will regroup and try again, perhaps with a lesser expensive option and more inclusive of voter concerns."

The new Twisp mayor as you know is Sarah Schrock's husband.

He states:

'"Please be advised that I am not yet Mayor in Twisp, and while I do anticipate taking on the challenge of creating a more viable funding framework for the Twisp pool, this is not something I am currently prepared to make casual comments on without substantial research and consideration."

They have the research already.

He further states:

"sustainable public pool located in Twisp will be a high personal priority for me as mayor,"

The FOP, when headed by his wife Sarah Schrock, has already stated that the only sustainable pool option is a Metropolitan Park District.

We will see that MPD prop come up again in a few years with better messaging and political strategy, perhaps targeting wealthy vacation homeowners.

They don't want hundreds of thousands of dollars that a slight increase in sales taxes would bring, they want millions of dollars to support the tourism industry here. I thought that was fairly obvious with the first two Metropolitan Park District attempts.

Remember Sarah says we have to compete with Bend for tourist tax dollars.

What's changed? Do you now trust these people?

[SOulman]

The incoming mayor of Twisp is in a tough spot.
The town has an unsustainable asset and a budget item that has a strong constituency. I think the incoming mayor has the skills to find a solution.
There are not many outside resources (grants) for public swim facilities, much less for big ones. If there were, we certainly would have heard about them in the course of the recent campaign.
My hope is that the ongoing discussion will address what is appropriate and possible for our community. I can envision a replacement pool proposal that can be supported by voters. It will take time.

[pasayten]

In other words, as major of Twisp he will be pursuing a Metropolitan Park District despite the wishes of the majority Voters who opposed this MPD prop twice.

Pursuing a MPD again if prop 1 fails is consistent with my conversation with Justin Porter prior to the Nov. election.

I did not see that in his response... Your comment is premature and purely speculative... Lets wait and see how this plays out.

BTW, my conversations with Justin prior to the election was that he would have preferred a sales tax option.

[Fun CH]

In other words, as major of Twisp he will be pursuing a Metropolitan Park District despite the wishes of the majority Voters who opposed this MPD prop twice.

Pursuing a MPD again if prop 1 fails is consistent with my conversation with Justin Porter prior to the Nov. election.

[pasayten]

Finally got a response from the soon to be Twisp Mayor...

Hi Ray -

Please be advised that I am not yet Mayor in Twisp, and while I do anticipate taking on the challenge of creating a more viable funding framework for the Twisp pool, this is not something I am currently prepared to make casual comments on without substantial research and consideration. If you are interested in helping Twisp work through this issue, I will gladly reach out to you once and if we begin work on this issue in a manner that involves research and analysis from interested members of the public. Ensuring we have a financially sustainable public pool located in Twisp will be a high personal priority for me as mayor, but it is a priority I have to balance with many other priorities that need to be shared with our new Town Council and the community. Until we are in our new positions and able to agree on the town's priorities, I do not think much work will be done on this matter.

I appreciate that you feel a need to help problem solve the public pool issue in response to the defeat of the metropolitan parks district. Thanks for staying engaged and I hope I'll be reaching out soon regarding possible solutions.

Sincerely,

Hans Smith

[pasayten]

My sales tax email... I pinged Andy and mayors for responses today...

Finally got a email response from Andy...

Sorry Ray, we’ve been in budgets and been a little busy with other things. I want to look into grant opportunities for replacement of the pool. I’ll keep you apprised. Since the County Commissioners have no jurisdiction with the town limits I would have to have you speak with the Mayors of those jurisdictions for their thoughts.

No response from either town mayor yet...

[pasayten]

Here are the revenue calculations for a 0.002% sales tax add on from a September post I made...

Year/Qtr Total Taxable Sales
Twisp
2023 Quarter 1 $9,064,861
2022 Quarter 4 $12,132,721
2022 Quarter 3 $13,333,064
2022 Quarter 2 $12,176,874
Total Sales $46,707,520
Add 0.2% pool sales tax $93,415 revenue

Winthrop
2023 Quarter 1 $13,161,226
2022 Quarter 4 $16,394,175
2022 Quarter 3 $24,148,852
2022 Quarter 2 $19,262,811
Total Sales $72,967,064
Add 0.2% pool sales tax $145,934 revenue

Total Pool Sales Tax Revenue per year $239,349

[dhop]

Ray, FOP’s most modest pool option was for a competition pool with attached recreational pool that could be covered in the future. The cost of $6.8 to $11.8 (without the cost of land) and annual expenses of $75,000 to $125,000 would seem to make it perfect for the sales tax option. The $10 million requirement would be met and Twisp taxes alone would come close to covering pool expenses. And you could spend $100 in town every day for a year and the tax hit would be only a total of $73.