The Homer City Council last Monday unanimously voted down an ordinance that, subject to voter approval, would have continued a 0.3% sales tax to fund the construction of a new community recreation center, citing the current “nebulousness” of the project.
The move comes after mixed feedback from the community and extensive discussion among the council members since an earlier version of the ordinance underwent a separate public hearing in July. While the council and community have largely agreed for some time that Homer is in need of a new rec center — particularly since both buildings at the Homer Education and Recreation Complex were determined to contain hazardous materials — a lack of concrete details, including an estimated project cost and an established location for the new center, created hesitation to pass the ordinance now.
Currently, Homer’s sales tax rate is 7.85%, which includes the 3% Kenai Peninsula Borough sales tax. Of the remaining 4.85%, 0.3% has been directed toward paying debt service on a general obligation bond which funded the construction of the new police station on Grubstake Avenue — an increase which was authorized by city voters in 2018. Per the ordinance, the police bond sales tax is set to expire on Dec. 31 of the calendar year in which the bond is paid in full. The city currently anticipates being able to pay off that bond next year, which means the 0.3% sales tax would be terminated on Dec. 31, 2026.
Ordinance 25-52 would have placed on the Oct. 7 city ballot the question of whether to enact a new 0.3% sales tax for the acquisition and construction of a new multipurpose recreation facility, following the expiration of the existing police bond sales tax, for a term of eight years. While consumers may not have seen a real change in the city sales tax rate, because the city would effectively implement a new tax increase, per state statute the ordinance must be authorized by a majority of voters at a regular or special election.
During the Aug. 11 public hearing, city resident Heath Smith said he understood the timing issue of placing the proposition on the upcoming ballot, but he believed that there was more work to do before it went to the voters.
“I think that the people deserve to know where, what and how much they’re going to invest in before they are posed with the question on whether they’re willing to spend the money,” he told the council. He also voiced concern that because the city does not currently know the cost for the project, the proposed eight-year term was “arbitrary” and might not be enough time to pay off a bond.
“The amount of time that we had on the books for the police station was much more extended than what it is now. We handled that money right, and it was spent well, and we paid it off early,” he said. “I would encourage us to do the work before we put it before the people so they can make an informed decision.”
Kate Finn, on the other hand, was “100% behind” putting the ordinance on the ballot this year and “letting the community decide.”
“I understand exactly what Heath is saying, and it probably would be extremely good for people to have an idea of what it’s actually going to cost, but I think we need to keep our eyes on the prize,” she said. “This goal of a rec center has been started and dropped and discussed for years, and it seems like there is a will right now, and there is a financial possibility of making it happen.”
At the start of the council’s discussion, council member Shelly Erickson said she couldn’t vote in favor of the ordinance.
“When we set it up with the police department, we told the people that we would cut it off, and then it would be a break, and then we would re-put it out there,” she said. “I feel like to vote for this would make me a liar. That being said, I know that we need to go there. I think it’s a matter of timing.”
Erickson agreed with Smith that the eight-year period felt arbitrary, and said that the council “didn’t have anything to give the community” until they better knew “what our actual needs are.”
“If we wait until next year and everybody can just vote for it to stay the same, and that’s our message, I think that would be easier for everyone to swallow than to do this with it being so nebulous,” she said.
Council member Caroline Venuti added that, based on phone calls she’s received from some community members about the project, public perception might not currently be such that the ballot proposition would pass.
Council member Donna Aderhold, who co-sponsored the ordinance, said she had been torn about it “for all the reasons that have been discussed,” but that she also didn’t want to wait to put it on the ballot next year and have it affect the renewal of the Homer Accelerated Roads and Trails Fund, which is slated to appear on the 2026 October ballot.
The HART fund is funded by a consumer’s sales tax of 0.75% and, Aderhold confirmed Monday, originated through a ballot measure which stipulates that the tax be reauthorized every 10 years.
“Reauthorization comes up again next year and if not passed by the voters it will significantly impact the city’s ability to maintain roads and trails and add new sidewalks and trails,” she wrote in an email to Homer News.
At the same time, she commented during the Aug. 11 meeting, the city does “have some funds set aside that we can get started with.”
“We have some money set aside, currently, that once we do have a location, we can start putting some preliminary plans together and … get community input on that. So we have some time,” she said.
Council member Jason Davis said during the Aug. 11 meeting that he also had mixed feelings about the ordinance.
“If it were me in the ballot box, I would definitely vote for it. I think it would be fantastic to start building up a fund that we will eventually be able to use to build this thing that the community wants so badly,” he said.
At the same time, Davis said, he’s heard concern from community members in favor of the project overall that the ballot proposition wouldn’t pass “without the details that the public would want to see,” and that the project would lose momentum if it were voted down.
Mayor Rachel Lord reminded the council that a multiuse community center is listed as the No. 2 priority in the city’s 2025-2030 capital improvement plan.
“It is well documented that the people want this. So, with that in mind, I think I do have quite a bit of faith that when we have a project, the people will vote to fund it,” she said. “It will have to be right-sized. It will have to be something that people feel like they can afford. I do believe that we can get there.”
Additional discussion amongst the council noted that there are a number of ballot propositions included in the borough election, which some council members felt might affect the passage of the rec center proposition. Erickson also floated the idea of creating a recreational service area similar to the one proposed for Ninilchik, which voters will also decide on in October. Further discussion on a service area was tabled for future.
During the comments of the audience period at the end of the meeting, Finn said that she was “very sad” about the decision to vote down the ordinance, though she understood the council’s reasons and respected their unanimous vote to do so.
Erickson said she didn’t see the vote as a negative.
“We’re only getting started. We’re not pushing it back,” she said. “We’ve got some big things to do, and I am looking forward to watching this rec center come together — and come together in the right way — where we can all continue to enjoy that.”
Council member Brad Parsons said that the vote to fail the ordinance was ultimately the best decision for the city going forward, even though there’s going to be some disappointment.
“I am fully committed to this rec center. I think that this will light a fire to put a plan together so that when we’re ready to go to the ballot, we have a firm, steady document,” he said.
A companion ordinance, 25-55, which would have appropriated $8,000 from the Community Recreation Center Fund for a public information campaign to educate voters on the ballot proposition, was also voted down following Ordinance 25-52’s failure.
Find the Aug. 11 meeting recording in full at www.cityofhomer-ak.gov/citycouncil/city-council-regular-meeting-343.
The Homer City Council’s next regular meeting will take place on Monday, Aug. 25, at 6 p.m. in the Homer City Hall Cowles Council Chambers.
