Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 06/11/1984CITY COUNCIL JUNE 11, 1984 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, June 11, 1984 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, Leona Lansing, George Mona, William Peters Others Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Jim Cheng, Free Press; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Don Whitten, Water Pollution Control Dept.; Lawrence Coffin, James Rowley, William Schuele Additions to the agenda The following items were added to the agenda: 1) Formally set the tax rate 2) Discuss any additional appropriations needed under Section 1308 to balance the books at the end of the year. Comments and questions from the public (not related to items on the agenda) There were none. Sign applications and resolution approved at the June 4, 1984 meeting for the Queen City Park Community Development Grant Mr. Szymanski passed around the application and resolution (see attached copies) and the Council signed them, with the exception of Mr. Peters. Sign two (2) Water Department short term note renewals Mr. Szymanski noted that these two notes were renewed annually. They are with the Merchants Bank. The first is for $33,600 for improvements done in the Proctor Avenue area and the interest rate is 7.1%, and the other is for $11,145 for Spear St, improvements. Mr. Flaherty moved to sign the notes and Ms. Lansing seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Discuss the coming Airport Parkway Sewage Treatment Plant upgrade bond issue Mr. Farrar noted that the Council had authorized a consulting engineer to draw plans for a 2.3 mgd plant about 1 month ago. Mr. Szymanski said the State should have the figures ready by Friday, but that he felt the cost for expansion would be $1 million of the city's $2.8 million share of the total cost. One method of paying for this which has been suggested is to charge new developers for the sewer gallonage they will use. The expansion cost is $1 million, and over 20 years at 10% interest, it will cost another $1 million, for a total of $2 million. That would work out to be $2.00 per gallon. As an example, Mr. Szymanski said a single family home used 350 gallons per day, so each new home in the area served by this plant would be assessed a one-time $700 charge. Mr. Farrar suggested a tax incremental district. This would require a Charter change. A map would be drawn of the area served by the plant and any new construction which took place in that area as a result of the expansion of capacity would have its taxes allocated to paying for the plant. This would continue until the plant was paid for. The tax rate for this new construction would be the same as everyone else's, but the taxes paid would go toward paying off the sewer expansion. He felt that under this system, the plant would be paid off in 1 1/2 years, based on the rate of past development in the area. This idea was discussed. Mr. Peters was concerned about the bond issue not passing and he wondered if the issues of water quality and additional capacity could be separated. Mr. Farrar said that would mean a new design and additional cost. In regard to how the cost would be paid, he wondered why the policy should be changed at this stage. Mr. Mona, looking at the existing residents of the city, wondered if it would be more equitable to charge the new residents for some portion of the cost of the increased capacity. Mr. Szymanski was asked to check with the City Attorney to see if both methods under discussion would require a Charter change. Mr. Farrar noted that there would be no growth in the city if the sewer plant was not expanded, but Mr. Peters pointed out that with increased growth comes increased demand for services, causing increased costs. Mr. Farrar stated that in the past the rate of growth in services had been smaller than the rate of growth of the community, including the school system. Mr. Mona felt Mr. Farrar's suggestion would starve city services other than the sewers for a period of time, and said he leaned toward a one-time charge. He suggested that perhaps gallonage should not be the criterion on which to base the charge - perhaps it should be the total value of the building constructed. Mr. Farrar pointed out that 3/4 of the cost for city services was generated by homeowners, because they need schools, as well as police and fire protection and other services. He asked Mr. Szymanski to check on the time frame for a Charter change, since the Council agreed it wanted to have the vote on the issue in September, since that way more money from other sources would be available. Mr. Flaherty moved to instruct the City Manager and the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate documents for a vote on the sewer upgrade and expansion bond issue in September. Mr. Mona seconded the motion. The motion does not address the question of paying for the costs, as discussed above. The motion carried with Ms. Lansing and Mr. Peters voting no. Mr. Peters was not convinced that the city knew where it was going with growth and he was not sure there was a need for this rapid action on getting the sewer system up to par. Ms. Lansing said she had questions on the funding and did not feel a bond issue would pass within the next year or two. Review Planning Commission agenda Mr. Mona asked for an explanation of one of the items. Minutes of June 4, 1984 The June 4, 1984 minutes were approved on a motion by Mr. Flaherty, a second by Ms. Lansing and a unanimous vote. Sign Disbursement Orders Disbursement Orders were signed. Any Other or Old Business Under Section 1309.4 of the Charter, the Council confirmed that it was using a Grand List of $2,265,900 as the Estimated Grand List for this year, since it has been decided that it is inappropriate to institute the new appraisals. This is the Grand List as presented to the Council by the City Manager on March 12, 1984. Mr. Flaherty moved to use an Estimated Grand List for fiscal year 1984-85 of $2,265,900. Ms. Lansing seconded the motion This is based on the City Manager's memo of 3/12/84 as presented to the Steering Committee. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Flaherty moved to set the city tax rate as presented to the Council on March 12, 1984 by the City Manager as $1.039 for the operating budget, $0.070 for the debt, including highways, $0.072 for Other Public Entities, and $0.103 for sewer debt, for a total of $1.284, and to set the School tax rate as presented in a memo from the School Department dated 3/12/84 at $3.297 for the operating budget. $0.164 for the bonded debt, for a total of $3.461, for a total of the two tax rates of $4.745. Ms. Lansing seconded the motion and it carried with all voting aye. Mr. Farrar felt there would be some overages and underages in the budget this year and he suggested that the City Manager be allowed to transfer some items between categories in order to cover those. Mr. Flaherty moved to allow the City Manager to transfer funds between separate departments for the purpose of balancing the budget in 1983-84. Ms. Lansing seconded the motion and all voted for it. Mr. Flaherty moved to authorize expenditures of $30,000 in excess of the budget to cover the transfer of $18,000 in open space funds to the Open Space account and to cover the $11,000 additional highway note, this authorization only to be used if necessary. Ms. Lansing seconded the motion and all voted aye. Mr. Coffin said he lived on Hinesburg Road and asked if there were any news on the speed limit reduction. Mr. Farrar told him what had been done so far on that. A traffic study has to be done in order to convince the State that the limit should be reduced on one of their roads. Mr. Szymanski hoped they could have some figures ready in a month. Mr. Rowley noted that the phone company had been parking cars on the road near their new site and he said that was dangerous. Mr. Szymanski said he would talk to them, and he was asked to contact Messrs. Rowley and Coffin after he spoke to the phone company. Consider going into Executive Session to discuss progress on Union negotiations Mr. Flaherty moved to adjourn and reconvene in Executive Session for the purpose of discussing progress in the union negotiations with our attorney and to reconvene in regular session only to adjourn. Ms. Lansing seconded the motion and all voted for it. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. I. APPLICATION USTRACT Title Chairman Phone 658-4549 Address 17 Yandow Drive, South Burlinqton, Vermont 05401 3. Contact Person: Wi 11 iam Syzmanski Title City Manager Phone 658-7955 Address 575 Dorset Street, South Burlinqton, Vermont 05401 4. Project Description: This project will establish a Community Development Plan for Fire District #1 in South Burlington. The Plan will propose different options, their costs, and a funding strategy to a variety of problems facing the neighborhood. The problemsthe plan will address are: Housing, shoreline protection, fire protection, recreational facilities and an aging water system. 5. Proposed Funding Sources: 6. Proposed Timetable a. Connnunity Development $ 10,000 Starting Date: Auqust 15, 1984 b. Other: (list by source) Completion Date: November 15, 1984 $ 7. This is a: [ X ] Single Application $ [ ] Joint Application (List ~unicipalities) c. TOTAL $ 10,000 8. To the best of my knowledge and belief, information in this application is true and correct, the application has been duly authorized by the Legislative Body of the Applicant and the Applicant has complied with the attached Certifi- cations. Receipt of Vermont Community Development Ptogram funds is con- ditional upon agreement to comply with the Assurances which apply to this grant category. , DHCA Use Only: '3 ( ,yL-rp- L 7 (Authorized signature) Paul Farrar. Chaban (~rinted/Typed Name and Title) qgx-,-uq.\984 u(~ate Signed) 12/83 PDG AGENCY OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Page I1 Project Development Grant Application Exhibit A Resolution for Single Applicant RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of South Burl ington is applying for a (City/Town/Village) (Name of Municipality) Project Development Grant under the Vermont Community Development Program, and WHEREAS, it is necessary that an application be made and agreements with the State of Vermont be entered into, Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. that the City of South Burlington applies for a (City/Town/Village) (Name of Municipality) Project Development Grant under the terms and conditions of 10 VSA Ch. 29 and enter into and agree to the understandings and Assurances, and 2. that Paul Farrar, Chairman is hereby authorized to (Name and Title of Authorized Person) execute and provide, on behalf of this municipality, all documents and information necessary for the completion of said application. Passed this 4th day of June , 1984. - LEGISLATIVE BODY (Signature) (Signature) The above resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution as finally adopted at a meeting of the City Council held on the 4th - day of (Legislative Body) June , 198 4 , and duly recorded in my off ice. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand thimday Marqaret Picard (Typed Name) , 12/83 PDG AGENCY OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Page 18