Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 01/15/2001CITY COUNCIL 15 JANUARY 2001 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 15 January 2000, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members present: J. Condos, Chair; T. Sheahan, C. Smith, D. O'Rourke, S. Magowan Also present: C. Hafter, City Manager; P. Bestenbostel, Asst. City Manager; J.B. Hoover, Director of Planning & Zoning; P. Taylor, J. Dinklage, M. B. Maher, D. Ladd, F. Blais, Board of Civil Authority; J. Vickery, City Assessor, A. Johnston, The Other Paper 1. Comments & questions from the audience not related to agenda items: No issues were raised. 2. Announcements & city manager's report: Mr. Sheahan: The Regional Planning Commission will meet on the updated Regional Plan on 26 January. Public comment will be limited at this meeting. Mr. Condos: The MPO will meet on 17 January at Winooski Town Hall. One of the items on the agenda will be access and traffic management in the area of the airport. Mr. Dinklage noted that he had talked with J. J. Hamilton at the airport about the tension between the city and the airport and had suggested the council and airport commission get together and come up with a document regarding expectations on both sides. Mr. Dinklage said Mr. Hamilton had seemed receptive to this idea. Mr. Hafter: Money has been received from a Vermont Community Development grant. There will be a meeting on 31 January in Montpelier regarding town halls and post offices. Mr. Hafter will attend. Juli Hoover, the new Director of Planning & Zoning was introduced. The Police Dept. will give out its annual awards on 17 January, 5 p.m., at the Clarion. All are welcome to attend. Dubois and King has received the contract with the state regarding the temporary railroad station. The project has not yet gone to the DRB. Mr. Magowan volunteered to attend a meeting on 24 January, 3 p.m. on the project. There is a major effort by the MPO to develop a land use-transportation model. The next review of that effort will be on 18 January, 9 a.m. to noon at the Clarion Hotel. The city has applied for a transportation grant to do research on a pedestrian easement inventory. The next Legislative Breakfast will be on 5 February, 7:30 a.m. at City Hall. Pictures for the annual report will be taken at the next council meeting on 5 February. The Coalition for Municipalities has a lawsuit pending regarding the method used by the state for equalization. Mr. Hafter noted that the city has gotten its calculation and is satisfied. There is a question as to whether the city wants to appeal in order to keep its options open. Mr. Condos felt that if the figure is OK this year, the city could appeal next year if it were not satisfied with the new figure. Members agreed to meet on 12 February instead of on President's Day. 3. Review of proposed procedure for equalization of property values: Mr. Vickery said he had worked with Mr. Hafter and Mr. Bestenbostel and they have come up with a reasonable means of bringing properties that are out of line into line for equalization purposes. Mr. Hafter noted that the city attorney has reviewed the method and said it is OK. He said it is important to identify properties that are the most out of line because other taxpayers pay for this. Mr. O'Rourke asked if the city is required to remain revenue neutral when it does this. Mr. Hafter said it is not, but the city does choose to remain revenue neutral. Mr. Hafter noted that if there are unusual circumstances Mr. Vickery will go out and reassess whole groups of properties (if a neighborhood is 15% below or 5% above the CLA or if the neighborhood COD is above 10%). This year two neighborhoods will be reassessed. Once an assessment is made to the market value, it is then adjusted to the CLA number so the property is equalized to all properties in the city. Mr. Hafter noted it cost the city $240,000 to do a reappraisal when Mr. Vickery doesn't look at any properties. Mr. Blais asked if a citizen has the opportunity to appeal each year based on the comparability concept. Mr. Hafter said yes. Mr. Bestenbostel noted that under Act 60, you are reappraising every year, which was never the case before. He said they are trying to get a system in place that addresses the problems in South Burlington and trying to do it in a way that is fair and cost effective. Mr. Blais said it is important to let the community understand the process including the basis on which they can appeal. Mr. Taylor felt that this system opens up the potential for a lot more appeals and he felt this would change the role of the BCA dramatically. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would depend on staff to go through the methodology with applicants before they get to the BCA. Mr. Condos asked when a person would get notified of a change in assessment or that there is no change (they might still want to appeal). Mr. Vickery said notices of new value are sent out in mid-May and people have 14 days in which to appeal. This information goes out with the notice. After they appeal, a notice is sent out as to whether the assessment has been changed or not. People then have another 14 days in which to appeal to the BCA. Mr. Condos noted if there isn't a change in the assessment, people don't get a tax bill until June, and it's too late to appeal then. Mr. Vickery said they can appeal, but a change, if any, wouldn't be made until the next year. Mr. O'Rourke noted that the problem last spring was the lack of notification to people. Mr. Hafter said this will be included in the notice of assessment. Mr. Bestenbostel asked that the BCA provide a list of the criteria for appealing. Mr. Sheahan moved to approve the use of this methodology for appraisals in the city and to adopt it as the method of equalization. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Further consideration of comments on the draft of the Regional Plan: Members suggested that all comments be incorporated in a response. Mr. Sheahan said one of his concerns is that the Regional Planning Commission is trying to give itself statutory capacity it doesn't have. There is also no means to hold the RPC accountable for its decisions. He felt the document implies it has some powers it doesn't have. Ms. Hoover said she was concerned that the "ABC" designations appear to go "top down." She felt this might cost a lot of legal fees. Mr. Condos said he would like to see a statement up front that this is a "conceptual document" not to be construed as a zoning document. Mr. O'Rourke said the fundamental problem is the absence of regional organization. Mr. Condos said he thought a lot of the plan was being driven by elitism with some people trying to drive most development into "growth centers" so they could live on their 10 acres somewhere else. 5. First reading of amendment to Motor Vehicle Ordinance prohibiting parking on Fayette Drive in the vicinity of Shelburne Road; schedule public hearing: Members agreed on the seriousness of the problem. Mr. Magowan suggested making this a tow-away zone. He felt the problem created a safety issue, as you couldn't get a fire truck through there. He also suggested giving people ample warning that this will be happening. Mr. Condos read the proposed amendment. Members agreed to make it a tow-away zone. Mr. O'Rourke moved to approve the first reading with the addition of language to make this a tow-away zone, and to schedule a public hearing for 12 February. Mr. Magowan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Consideration of Cooperative Agreement with State of Vermont and Vermont Railway, Inc., for construction of storm-water treatment pond: Mr. Hafter said this is a standard agreement. Mr. Magowan moved to authorize the city manager to sign the agreement. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Presentation of update to Comprehensive Plan for 2001 and setting of schedule for adoption: Mr. Hafter noted that the Planning Commission had approved the plan and sent it on to the Council. The Council needs to hold two public hearings. He recommended a first reading on 5 February, continued review on 5 March, and public hearings on 19 March and 2 April. 8. Resignation from Development Review Board: Mr. Magowan moved to accept the resignation of George Chamberland from the Development Review Board and to have the City Manager send a letter of appreciation. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Review agenda for DRB meeting on 16 January 2001: No issues were raised. 10. Sign disbursement orders: Disbursement orders were signed. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.