DULUTH — Duluthians narrowly rejected an increase to their annual investment in the city's massive park system Tuesday.
Duluth voters narrowly reject park levy increase
The measure lost by about 200 votes.
With all precincts reporting, the measure was defeated by about 200 votes, with 18,262 voting against it and 18,060 voting to approve the increase.
Mayor Emily Larson said in a Wednesday morning statement that she was "disappointed" but heartened that nearly half of voters supported parks.
"What that tells me is that the default, basic premise of funding public space and parks is a resonant, core value. Even while people are hurting," she said.
Voters were asked to approve conversion of the Park Fund levy to a fixed percentage of property value dedicated to parks funding, rather than continue paying the fixed dollar amount — $2.6 million annually — approved by voters in 2011. The change from a fixed dollar amount to a fixed percentage would mean tax collections would vary in line with property values.
City officials have cited declining playground and facility conditions and the role parks play in Duluth's economy as reasons for the request.
Voters Tuesday shared concerns about higher taxes as they struggle to pay bills, and city priorities.
Duluth firefighter Spencer Gebhardt said Tuesday he voted against the parks levy.
"I voted no because the mayor prioritizes parks above public safety," he said.
But others said park support was crucial to the city's future.
Wil Schulze, a 21-year-old University of Minnesota Duluth student, said he supported the tax increase because parks are one of the city's "driving forces."
"Everybody comes to Duluth for the parks," he said. "It's one of those things we just need and we need to take care of."
Additional money would have allowed the city to invest in deteriorating community centers, playgrounds and athletic facilities. The city will continue to collect $2.6 million annually, but parks capital funding is expected to dwindle as money set aside for long-term projects pays for daily operations instead, city officials have said.
The proposal suggests removing the 20-year protection on the Superior National Forest that President Joe Biden’s administration had ordered in 2023.