May 16, 2005

-- O P E N L E T T E R --

TO: Provo Municipal Council
351 West Center Street
Provo, Utah 84601

RE: Proposed School District Land Exchange and
Proportionality of City Services (Parks, etc.)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Proposed School District Land Exchange - In our May 3, 2005 Municipal Council Meeting, the Council voted to authorize the surplus and possible exchange of a portion of the current Joaquin Elementary School site, owned by the City, for another parcel of property in the Harbor Park Neighborhood, owned by the School District. I applaud your unanimous decision.

Since that decision, some of us have received strong expressions of opposition for that transaction from one neighborhood chair and a few others. While I respect the passion that drives their opposition, I respectfully believe that passion is rooted in a sole focus on the important issues affecting only one neighborhood.

No one can legitimately suggest the City has failed "to make a significant difference in the central neighborhoods" in the last four to eight years, including the specific neighborhood in question. Can we and will we do more in these neighborhoods? Absolutely! But I hope we can all agree, the Municipal Council must also focus on the important needs of all neighborhoods in the entire City. I believe your May 3rd vote and action on this issue was rooted in seeking what was in the best interest of the greater whole.

We all watched with rapt interest, the difficult and challenging strategic planning process the Provo School District recently completed. Their process seems to have been an open and good one. While it is never possible to satisfy all, the Board worked hard to consider both the micro (specific neighborhood) and macro (city-wide) effect of their decisions. The Board’s decision to reprogram Farrer Middle School and leave it in the Joaquin neighborhood as a key elementary school was a huge win for this neighborhood and serves to validate their diligent effort to balance both the micro and the macro.

The District’s strategic planning process is now complete. It is time for them to begin to implement and execute that plan. Our conversations relating to the proposed trade transaction resulted from the District seeking to do just that. The proposed transaction is fully consistent with the strategic plan. It would be unreasonable to expect that the District should now put their implementation efforts on hold and reopen the planning process to satisfy a very few. Doing so would put meeting the needs of the greater whole at risk and be unfair to the greater majority.

I give the School Board high marks and support our doing everything reasonable we can to support their effective implementation of that plan.

Proportionality of City Services (Parks, etc) - Provo City enjoys an excellent reputation for the delivery of high quality and competitively priced services for all of its residents. We have sought to provide similar levels and quality of services for all residents, regardless of where they reside. In cases where disproportionate levels of service are required or requested, we generally require a fee from those benefitting from services beyond the proportionate or normal service level enjoyed by our residents as a whole.

In the case of our city parks system, we have developed a parks master plan that calls for a park within one-half mile of every residence. In all but a few cases, we have done an excellent job in meeting this standard (see attached map which shows a one-half mile radius circle around each park in the city).

In recent months, at least two neighborhoods have approached the city wanting parks beyond those currently proposed in the master plan which is based upon the one-half mile radius criteria. We consider such additional parks space to be disproportionate to that enjoyed by all residents as a whole, but we also see the value of additional open space. As such, in neighborhoods where there is already existing parks space based on the one-half mile radius criteria, we have been willing to support the creation of additional space only when the neighborhood itself has been willing to significantly participate in the costs associated with the acquisition and development of that additional space, which goes beyond the proportional city-wide standard.

This seems to be a reasonable policy and one that we should continue to pursue. We will never be able to provide all of the parks and open space many of us would ultimately desire. Even so, in neighborhoods where we have met the targeted standard and where there is yet a feeling of need for additional park space, we should be supportive of creating such, but generally only when the benefitting neighborhood is willing to step up to pay a significant portion of the costs associated with doing so. To do otherwise would result in a dis-proportionality of benefit for one taxpayer over another.

You continue to be faced by a never ending stream of challenging issues and decisions. We commend you for your diligence and hard work. Thank you for your consideration of this information.

Sincerely,

PROVO CITY MAYOR’S OFFICE

Lewis K. Billings

Mayor