Pro Parks Levy dollars won't run out until the end of 2008 but the Seattle Parks and Recreation department is planning now for how to absorb programs, staffing and maintenance now funded through the levy since city officials have made it clear it won't be renewed.

As well as purchasing and developing nearly 42 acres into open space, the $198 million levy voters approved in 2000 also provided about $62 million for environmental stewardship, maintenance and programming. That includes hundreds of teen leadership and senior/adult programs and financial assistance to low-income families so they can participate in before and after school programs at local community centers.

The levy also beefed up parks, trees, trails and athletic field maintenance across the city.

Those needs will be absorbed into the city's general fund budget over the next two years, but also be subject to Seattle City Council scrutiny and approval like other city department expenses, said Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis.

City council member David Della, chair of the parks, education, libraries, and labor committee, said the council would have to evaluate park's "strategic business plan" to see whether the costs could be absorbed through general funds and fees, or possibly another levy.

"I think that's an important exercise," said Della. "Anytime you use public funds is has to be accountable. The council has a desire to keep the system going and going good..."

Ceis said the mayor does not want to rely on a voter-approved levy to pay for routine park maintenance. Most of the parks department's operating budget comes from the city, fees and charges and competitive countywide sources.

Others, like Doug Dunham, a member of the Pro Parks Levy Oversight Committee, aren't so sure the various levy programs will survive in the long run. Dunham said the future of the maintenance and stewardship programs has been a question from the start.

"I don't think they'll be picked up," he said.

Other issues, particularly transportation and how to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, have overshadowed the need to renew the parks levy, said Susan Golub, strategic advisor for the parks department.

"Transportation has been a huge focus," she said. "It's a political decision and that's part of the issue."

The discussion of the levy loss has been happening within the parks department for the past year, said Dewey Potter, parks department spokesperson. As well as looking for ways to incorporate programs into other areas of the department, community partnerships could sustain them.

But some programs might be discontinued, she said.

"We really want to weigh it all," said Golub. "We're trying to be as creative as we can to start the new world after the levy."

Board of Parks Commissioner Terry Holme said he, too, was weary about the idea of putting maintenance and programs into a levy "because levies expire."

"It's been a concern from the very beginning," said Holme, who had hoped the city would renew the levy. "They (the city) are talking the talk about keeping this stuff up...but watch it. We're looking to the council to stand behind these improvements."

The department did express interest in getting the levy renewed, but the support from city leadership wasn't there, said Donald Harris, park and green space acquisition manager for Pro Parks.

"Obviously we're disappointed that there's not going to be a levy renewal," said Harris. "There's no question there will be a retrenchment. But there are other things coming to the fore."

The city is also dealing with costs associated with two community centers levies passed in the 1990s that renovated or expanded nine community centers, and library and fire department capital levies that went towards the construction and renovation of new facilities.

"All that full cost is hitting the city at the same time," said Ceis. "Levies come and go...and then levies go off. It's a trade-off between city priorities."

The city's intention is to focus on how best to invest in the additional operations and maintenance needs from new developments before asking the voters for more parks money, said Ceis. But he didn't discount the possibility of another parks levy.

"The parks levy will come back around again, but I think it'll be a few years," said Ceis. "We need to fully absorb the operations and maintenance needs we're experiencing with the new parks and community centers."

But Holme wonders if another parks levy will be difficult to pass if it elapses, becoming a new tax.

"The psychology of it is it's easier to sell... if it's renewed," said Holme. "There's an enormous wish list - there'd be no problem coming up with projects."

To date, the levy has leveraged about $21 million through state and county matching funds, as well as private donations. Without a levy to provide a foundation for projects, many of those funds are unreachable because they require a dollar-for-dollar match.

Through those resources and the levy's $10 million opportunity fund, dollars set aside for unforeseen park development and land purchase, many citizen-initiated projects have been made possible, said Catherine Anstett, an open space planner for the parks department.

Without the opportunity fund, grassroots projects like the Junction Plaza in West Seattle may have never gotten off the ground, she said.

The Seattle Department of Neighborhoods Matching Funds grant included acquisition projects in the past, but is no longer eligible. It's been the levy's opportunity fund that's largely driven citizen-initiated projects during the past several years, said Anstett.

"As a result, (of the levy being gone) there's just no way for citizens to initiate a project," she said.

Staffing now in place with the levy could also be lost, said Joyce Moty, a member of the Pro Parks Oversight Committee.

"We have put together a very effective and efficient group of people that will be lost once the levy is gone," she said. "It's creating a bigger uphill climb."

Tree restoration and maintenance crews will likely be cut, public restrooms will get messier and teen and senior programs will be vulnerable, Moty predicted.

"I think when push comes to shove the things that don't get lobbied the most will go or get lost in the shuffle," she said.

The mayor has other plans to fund open space in Seattle. The city is still working on legislation for an open space "impact fee," in which developers building in crowded neighborhoods would have to contribute money for parks and public open space.

But Della said he isn't sure that burden should fall to business owners. Money for parks should come from the parks department, he said.

"We need to be creative how we get revenue into the parks department," Della said.

Rebekah Schilperoort may be reached at rebekahs@ballardnewstribune.com or 783.1244.