ST. GEORGE — Residents spoke both for and against a proposed $29 million general obligation bond for trails, parks and recreation during a St. George City Council meeting Thursday. While some questioned the necessity and timing of the bond, others said it is needed to continue the quality of life that recreation provides locals for years to come.

“It’s an investment in our present and our future,” Shawn Christensen, president and CEO of the St. George Area Chamber of Commerce told the City Council while voicing support for the bond.

The bond is meant to replace a similar bond passed in the mid-1990s that expires this year. Under the previous bond, many recreational projects were brought to fruition. Former projects include the Sand Hollow Aquatics Center, the Fields at Little Valley, St. George Skate Park, Snow Canyon Parkway Trail and many other parks and trails.

The proposed bond — which will be included on the November ballot for residents to vote on — would fund 33 city projects over the next 25 years. These projects would include the expansion and improvement and various parks and trails and the construction of new ones. Facilities like the Dixie Sunbowl and Town Square would also see improvements.

Since the bond is a ballot item, state law requires the city hold a public hearing for residents to voice their concerns. Before public comment got underway, the City of St. George presented an argument in support of the bond in a letter read by the City Recorder Christina Fernandez.

The 1996 bond has “played a big part in why St. George today is such a great place to live, work and play, and the community is a sought-after destination,” Fernandez read.

The city’s recreational facilities were touted as providing for the physical and mental well being of city residents, as well as being an economic benefit as they are an attraction to visitors and add to the desire of people to move to St. George. These points were repeated when Christensen spoke on behalf of the St. George Area Chamber.

St. George resident Richard Faulkner submitted a written rebuttal to the city’s argument that was also read.

Faulkner wrote that the city should prioritize its budget and save for the unexpected, with whatever is left to be used for “any wanted items which are nice to have.” He also said borrowing money at a time of economic uncertainty was “lunacy” and that suggested residents should vote against the bond.

Faulkner also noted the actual cost of the $29 million bond could be as high as $45 million due to interest, which is confirmed on the city’s website. He also claimed the city plans to raise property taxes next year, which city officials have denied.

“Its time to send a clear message that taxpayers do have limits,” Faulkner’s letter stated. “This isn’t the end of it, and for some this is another bite in their resources as inflation eats away at needed money.”

The city provided a written rebuttal of its own that stated the claims to hike property taxes in 2025 were incorrect. Addressing taxes connected to the proposed band, they are calculated to be the same as the prior bond so residents won’t see an increase. The annual rate incurred by the bond is estimated to be around $32 based on a home valued at $585,000.

As for why the city is seeking to borrow money to fund future recreation-related projects, it was argued that the bulk of the money in the city’s $519 million budget already goes to obligations and priorities like public safety, utilities and streets, leaving little funding for recreational projects by comparison.

“The need for additional investments arises from the growing community,” Fernandez said as she read the city’ rebuttal. “Expanding parks and trails and expanding existing facilities ensures that residents can continue to enjoy high quality recreational spaces. These enhancements address critical needs that cannot be funded from existing sources and contribute significantly to the well being of residents.”

A total of 15 people approached the City Council to voice their opinion, either for or against the bond. Resident Dana McCabe said she was concerned the bond was to be used for new recreational projects only.

“If it can’t go to maintenance, how are these new projects going to be maintained?” she said. “There’s got to be additional costs in here that aren’t mentioned.”

It was later stated by Robert Myers, the city’s budget and financial planning manager, that it was preferred not to use one-time funding for issues like maintenance. Myers added the city is confident that regular funds can adequately provide for the upkeep of St. George parks and trails.

Another resident, Erica Hodges, said she felt the people were being overtaxed. And that no change in taxes paid meant no tax relief in general.

“We have so many parks already,” she said. “We’ve overplayed our hand in that.”

Despite the handful of voices calling for resident to vote against the bond, the majority at Thursday night’s public hearing spoke in favor.

Kenneth Hinton, who represented the 500-plus member Quality of Life Coalition that supports the bond, said he voted in favor of the 1996 bond and considers it to be one of his best decisions. However, who also said he worried the city’s quality of life will suffer if the new bond fails to pass.

“If we do not approve that bond our quality of life will go down as the city grows and we cannot afford to continue to grow our facilities to match the growth of the city,” Hinton said.

Gary Esplin, a former city manager, stressed a need to consider the bond’s future impacts and benefits.

“We can’t look at this just for today, we have to look at it for 25 years down the road,” he said. “I, for one, am saying that’s a great investment … I hope the public sees the advantage of this.”

Ballots for the upcoming Nov. 21 general election will being to be mailed out the week of Oct. 31. More information about the trails, parks and recreation bond can be found on the city’s website here.

Points made for and against the bond during Thursday night’s public hearing can be viewed below, courtesy of the City of St. George and Community Education Channel.

Copyright St. George News, SaintGeorgeUtah.com LLC, 2023, all rights reserved.