Council
Chambers
Special
Session
A) CALL TO ORDER
The Council for the City of
B) PRAYER
C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
D) ROLL CALL
On roll call, the following members answered present: Mr. Gabbard, Mr. Sanker, Mr. Schneider, Mr. Moore, and Mr. Barlow.
Mr. Schneider served as Clerk of Council, Pro-Tem.
E)
SECOND
A) RESOLUTION
DECLARING THE NECESSITY OF LEVYING A TAX FOR CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES IN
EXCESS OF THE TEN-MILL LIMITATION AND REQUESTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO CERTIFY
MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
Discussion opened up with Mr. Moore commenting on last night’s conversation about what this levy was actually going to cost home owners. As he recalled from the documents he saw from Mr. Murray at the Auditor’s office, on $100,000 house, it would be $74 a year, not $74 every 6 months. Mr. Moore added that the Mayor would like to convey his apology for not being here but that he was feeling un-well.
Mr. Schneider asked a question through the Chair to Mr. Sanker asking that if we could establish a reserve fund up to a specific dollar amount, would we at some point feel confident enough to remove this levy?
Mr. Sanker replied that they actually talked about his before. Right now we are on thin ice, but if we do get to a point where we are in a financial situation we could say we are done with this and don’t need it anymore, we could definitely put it on the ballot to repeal it. We are having a very good year with earnings tax and are very fortunate that our earnings tax is on the increase more than just one or two percent. Having said that, it would take more than two years with the earnings tax increases we’ve seen from last year to equal the amount of revenue this levy generates.
Mr. Moore added to Mr. Schneider’s question regarding the reserve fund. He said that he would welcome discussion on what that number might be; perhaps that should be 10% of our normal operating budget. There are more important questions before we get to that; there are questions about where we spend our money. If this levy doesn’t get on the ballot or doesn’t pass we would squeak by but we wouldn’t be able to make progress or generate any type of surplus. We’re in better shape than we have been and we can carry over surplus. There are generally four funds that pull from a surplus. We have employees who took no raises for a year. I personally believe that if we are not in a fiscal crisis, that our employees deserve a cost of living increase. That takes away from increased earnings and that’s not to mention any kind of a merit raise or adding employees. The second area of large investment is capital improvement. We need a pumper, we could use a new ambulance, and we should be buying two or three police cars per year at minimum. We have needed improvements on our buildings, our parks, our pools and we could use computers just to bring us up to date. The third important area is putting money away for a contingency. We should have money set aside for any kind of emergency that can come up – a disaster of some sort, a huge infrastructure situation, the economy goes sour – whatever the situation. And of course the fourth major area is streets. We could spend 1.7 million, the same amount this levy is generating, on our streets in Ward 1 alone for 2008. Could we get by without this levy? Sure, but we’re not going to get these things done and we’re not going to deliver the kind of city that we all want to live in. These items still do not touch on the hundreds of ideas that have been presented to each of us over the years. Things like an upgraded web site, a city newspaper, money to tear down vacant buildings, a marketing campaign for the city, property surveys, streetscaping, and many others. If we don’t pass this, we’re never going to do most of these items. We still need long term projections that we have never been able to get from our financial people about where we are going to be in three or four years. If this doesn’t pass, there’s no point in discussing a reserve fund because we will just scrape by without this renewal. Mr. Moore then went on to say that the term emergency levy came up again last night and that he looked through this Resolution and no where does it call this an emergency levy. This terminology was used in 1987 because it was passed under an emergency basis.
Mr. Schneider noted that his concern is that we still don’t have anyone in place that looks at the budget and be sure this City’s finances are in good shape. When we talk about putting another 1.7 million dollars out there, my feeling is that it will go in the general fund and be absorbed. I want more thought put into what we really need.
Mr. Sanker said that he doesn’t agree. To speak on the Mayor’s behalf as he is under the weather, there have been a number of people that have been interviewed for the budget analyst and that is still an ongoing process. In regards to commitments of the funds generated by the levy, the second resolution on the agenda tonight does lay out some commitments and where this money is going. Some of it is specifically designated to specific areas – street renovation and general overall improvements on the appearance of the city. We are moving forward in the right direction.
Mr. Moore said in reality, no, we don’t have a five year plan. Like the street plan, what’s the point of going and re-surveying the streets if you don’t have any way to pay to start fixing them? We can say we’re not going to put a levy on the ballot until we have it worked out to show where every dollar is going to go. We could do that, I don’t know how long it would take to put that together, but I know it’s not going to be done by mid August. We can put it on the ballot and leave it up to the people of this City. If the people don’t trust their elected officials to spend tax money wisely, then they can vote against the levy. I’m all in favor of going forward with this – put it on the ballot and let the people decide.
On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Sanker, it was moved to hear the second reading of the resolution. The following members voted YES: Mr. Gabbard, Mr. Sanker, Mr. Moore and Mr. Barlow. The following members voted NO: Mr. Schneider
B) RESOLUTION
DECLARING COUNCIL’S INTENT TO ALLOCATE THE
PROCEEDS OF AN EIGHT (8) MILL
RENEWAL LEVY, IF PASSED BY THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF
Mr. Schneider directed a question to Mr. Sanker asking about this Resolution that earmarks $400,000 to streets, $200,000 to capital improvements and $100,000 for the reserve fund. Mr. Schneider asked how these numbers were determined.
Mr. Sanker replied by relaying discussions with the Mayor, whereby the Mayor felt as if these numbers would be a minimum starting point to work with in those three particular areas.
Mr. Schneider asked if these dollars would be utilized with grant money. Mr. Schneider asked if anyone knew about any grant dollars being sought after for streets by the Administration.
Mr. Sanker said he had not heard anything from the Administration on anything in particular, but would say that between this fund and some of the permissive tax funds we would able to match funds or grants that would potentially be available. Some of these funds could be earmarked for that if something came up that needed a match to do a significant amount of street repair.
Mr. Moore added that Mr. Joe Geers is constantly looking at and applying for grants. Mr. Moore added that these numbers are a great starting point and that he intends that the City is going to spend a lot more than these numbers on streets and put more than that into a reserve fund.
On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Barlow, it was moved to hear the second reading of the resolution. All members present voted YES.
F) EXCUSE ABSENT MEMBERS
On a
motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Sanker, it was moved to excuse the absent
members. All members present voted YES.
G) ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Sanker, it was moved to adjourn. All members present voted YES.
______________________________ ______________________________
J. Brian Mumper Jane
M. Grote
Clerk of Council President
of Council