HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-0319 Document Submitted at Mtg
S 3 II(9/l3
mutt
Date: March 19, 2013 14d re u
To: Ashland City Council
Subject: City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Item VI (Mount Ashland Association)
Mayor Stromberg and Council,
As Ashland residents, we have been following the Mount Ashland Associations project
activities on a consistent basis for the past several years. The most recent of these projects
is the SUMMER WORK PLAN, as presented to the U.S. Forest Service in a letter from
the Mount Ashland Association (MAA) dated February 24, 2013. The content of the
letter is the subject matter of Agenda Item VI. However, the City-MAA Lease Agreement
of October 2011 ultimately governs the conduct of the projects described in the letter.
We wish to express our concern specifically in regard to Page 2, Section 4 (e) of the
Agreement. In the first sentence, the term `binding financial commitments' is listed as
one of the qualifying factors for proceeding with projects. We're not certain if this has
been thoroughly discussed and defined, but we hope it does not imply `pledges' and other
assurances that may in fact have no formal and legal binding effect.
The `Tidings' has lately been running MAA display ads with both donor testimonials and
open solicitations for donations. One could surmise that this is because of `tax season',
or one could surmise that MAA currently needs money. In either instance, we strongly
urge the Council to re-visit this specific language of the Agreement. Please ensure that
`pledges' and other non-binding arrangements are not construed by either party as
`available funds' for the purpose of project finance.
Our concerns lie in the fact that the MAA has a noticeable history of funding difficulties.
A significant portion of MAAs newer project proposals are physically irreversible in
nature once started, with the actual expansion being a prime, but not sole example. In the
event MAA were to fail at a project-critical time and no other operators came forth
(which is a realistic possibility) the obvious shortfall default would be the City. Ashland
taxpayers could then have a unique and significant burden to bear; that of a compromised
watershed infrastructure precipitated by financially failed recreation projects.
Although you may be weary of hearing about it, we urge you to take some extra time to
ensure that the interests of the public are being adequately protected in the course of your
proceedings with the MAA. Thank you for attention and efforts.
Sincerely and Respectfully,
ANDREW KUBIK MARY CODY
1251 Munson Drive Ashland, OR 97520