Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes_CCWorkMeeting_03152016" " CITY COUNCIL WORK MEETING MARCH 15, 2016  6:00 P.M. IONA COMMUNITY CENTER PRESENT: Mayor Brad Andersen, Council Member Rob Geray, Council President Dan Gubler, Council Member Kathy McNamara, Council Member Dan Gauen, Public Works Director Zech Prouse, Building Inspector Allen Eldridge, Chief of Police Karl Bowcutt, Officer Dustin Mathie, and City Clerk Shara Roberts. ABSENT: Treasurer/Deputy Clerk Amy Sullivan, and Public Works Laborer Bryce Stucki VISITORS: Bryce Contor and Officer Malin Reynolds. Rockwell Development & Growth Discussion: Visitor Bryce Contor presented concerns regarding future development in the City of Iona, and provided Council Members a handout for reference purposes, Exhibit "A". Mr. Contor explained there are steps that can be taken to help isolate the City of Iona from the growth. He referenced the future development by Rockwell Homes going in on the North side of the City and explained if the main arteries into the new subdivision are Dayton Street, Main Street, and Olsen Street it will have a different effect on the community if the access was isolated to Telford Road. Furthermore, he explained there are different categories of costs the City doesn't have to incur unless they choose to. Mr. Contor encouraged the Council to make sure any future growth pays for everything that it costs, and to put those costs back on the developer. Mayor Andersen thanked Mr. Contor for his time and his presentation. He commented the information presented was food for thought as they begin the planning process this next year for the new development. Discussion of New Police Vehicle: Chief of Police Karl Bowcutt discussed the future of Iona's Police Department and the benefits of a second police vehicle. He explained he thought about the pros and cons of a second police vehicle, and the only con he could think of was cost. He has reviewed the Department's budget and the funds are available. He believes it would better serve the citizens and the employees. He presented a lease option which would require a payment of $7,400 per year up to 3 or 4 years. Upon, completion of the last year the City would be able to purchase the vehicle for $1.00, Exhibit `B". Chief Bowcutt asked for the Council thoughts. Mayor Andersen expressed when this was first discussed with the previous Chief it was decided one vehicle would be sufficient and two officers could work different shifts. However, he thinks that may have been a little short sighted after discussing it more with Officer Malin Reynolds who works for the Idaho Falls Police Department. 1 " " " Officer Malin Reynolds explained Idaho Falls Police Officers have two options: 1) they are charged one price to drive it directly to and from their jurisdiction to their resident or 2) they are charged a higher monthly price to have the option to drive it within City limits off duty. If officers come upon a situation in which they need to act, all of the gear and equipment is there and ready if needed. He has had his assigned police car for 8 years and it is treated as his main office. Furthermore, they were able to show nationally there is a cost savings for the Department when officers are given options to keep their cars home as it helps with response time, accountability, care, and maintenance. Mayor Andersen inquired if Idaho Falls Police Department has a defined mile radius officers are allowed to take vehicles home. Officer Malin Reynolds responded it was a 15-mile radius. However, there are situations if an officer's residence is a couple miles over the defined radius the Chief can go to the City Council and ask for permission. After further discussion, Council members determined it needed to be budgeted for and could potentially be considered for next year. Due to time constraints, the remaining agenda items were covered during the City Council meeting. Meeting adjourned 6:53 p.m. COUNCIL APPROVED: April 19, 2016 ATTEST: Shara Roberts, City Clerk Brad Andersen, Mayor 2 March 15, 2016 Mayor Brad Andersen Iona City Council Re: Alternate viewpoint on annexation and growth Dear Mayor and Council Members — Thank you for the opportunity to appear at the work session. This letter provides a written record, and detail I expect not to have time for. I apologize for not having participated earlier or more often in civic affairs. It is not apathy that has kept me away, it is a strong aversion to conflict and a keen sense of my own inadequacy. I also apologize for appearing to not trust City leadership. Ours is a representative government, and as City leaders you can only represent me if you know my views. Page 73 of the November 7, 2007 City of Iona Comprehensive Plan states: "...studies in other Idaho communities demonstrate that residential development does not normally generate tax revenues sufficient to cover the costs of the public services it requires." This view conflicts with the current mindset that we "have to annex." The urgency to annex seems to be driven by two needs. One is the need to control what happens in the growth areas, and one is to generate revenues to pay for City services that will be utilized by the new residents, whether annexed or not. I respect that there are good reasons to hold these opinions, but I'd like to present a citizen's alternate viewpoint. My motivations are selfish. Bluntly stated, I like Iona small. If I wanted to live in Ammon, I would. I don't want to see anything that encourages or facilitates growth. Please consider two alternate viewpoints on the issue of control: • Rather than focusing solely on what happens, we can take steps to isolate ourselves from it. The development coming on the north side of town will have a very different effect upon Iona if all access is from Telford Road, than if Denning, Main and Owens become its arteries. • The City does have some influence over what happens within the Area of Impact, so it is not quite accurate to say we have "no control" unless we annex. I encourage you to become expert at a//the tools in the toolbox, before reaching automatically for the annexation hammer. Learn whose arms need to be twisted, and learn how to twist with vigor. 1 Exhibit "A" The larger issue for me is the perception that we have to annex to control costs. Last September I was at a national conference of water economists and there I heard exactly the message of the Comprehensive Plan; usually growth doesn't pay, it costs. For two weeks I've been looking at the 2015 City Budget, and I have some evaluations I hope the city leadership will consider: • About $200 K of City revenue, or more than 20%, came directly from the State of Idaho. It is not quite accurate that outsiders aren't paying anything. Further, many of us leave Iona nearly every day and utilize services in communities where we don't pay taxes. I suggest that some level of turn- about is fair play. • There are different kinds of costs to consider. One class of costs we are only obligated to incur if we annex. These include at least: o Police patrolling of neighborhoods and response to incidents in the neighborhood; o Snow removal and maintenance of neighborhood streets; o Water (if agreed); o Maintenance of new parks in the subdivision; o Street lights. I think we can agree that these costs should not be part of the discussion, since we are subject to them only if we chose to make it so. • Other costs are essentially fixed, and will be incurred whether we have visitors or not. The square has to be mowed and watered, snow has to be plowed, Main Street and Owens have to be patrolled, the clerk and treasurer have to perform their duties. I heard a highway engineer say on the radio a few years ago: "When it comes to wear and tear on roads, it's trucks. We don't even count cars." If this is true, then visitors to the park, library and 6- 12 don't even make much difference on street repairs. From the City Budget I estimate about $761 K of these kinds of costs. My percentages are first cuts and subject to refinement, but the principle is sound and I doubt I'm far off: 90% of administrative costs ($239 K x 0.90) $215 K 75% of police costs ($127 K x 0.75) $ 95 K 70% of misc. costs excluding maintenance [($130 K - $91 K) x 0.70] $ 27 K 90% of maintenance costs ($91 K x 0.90) $ 82 K 95% of capital improvement costs ($90 K x 0.95) $ 86 K 95% of water costs ($270 K x 0.95) $256 K • There are costs are directly affected by people coming in from outside City limits, but the activities generate revenue. Some of the participants in the recreation program must come from outside City limits, and surely their participation is part of what has driven this cost to $66 K. However, 2 recreation revenue was $73 K, so this influx of outsiders is not hurting us financially. • Other costs are directly affected by people coming in from outside. Some fraction of the administrative costs are related to the number of outsiders using City services, etc. The total of general fund and water -fund expenditures was $940 K. Subtracting the $761 K and $73 K discussed above, leaves $106 K arguably affected by the number of visitors. This just over 11% of total expenditures. If we presume county growth will double the number of visitors, and double those costs, we could see an increase of $106 K per year. Dividing $106 K by 783 gives about $135 per residence per year, or in round figures $12 per month. I would prefer a $12 per month tax increase, to having my water bill more than double (slide 19, August public meeting presentation) and having Dayton, Main and Owens transformed into arterials. I am only one voice, and I encourage you to reach out to all whom you represent. In 40 years of voting I cant recall once having an elected official ask my opinion, but I think it would be a worthy activity for representative government. If the majority favor annexation, at the very least I urge you to be fully aware of all the costs, and negotiate full compensation for them. Tonight I will walk home up Main street, and I'll feel safe. If Main becomes an arterial, I wont be unless there are curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and more streetlights. The same will be true of Dayton and Owens. Somebody has to pay for these. Be sure it is the developer and not the rest of us. Thank you, n Bryce A. Contor 5223 Owens 208 681 9100 bryce.contor@gmail.com 3 Municipal Finance Department 1 American Road, MD 7500 Dearborn, Michigan 48126 March 11, 2016 Steve Cederberg 20th Century Ford scederberg@hotmaii.com RE: City of Iona, ID, Quote #84780 Ford Credit Municipal Finance is pleased to present the following financing options for your review and consideration. * Option Quantity Description Price 1 2016 Ford Police Interceptor Sedan Payment Factor $26,733.00 I otai Amount Financed* Number of Payments Payment Timing APR Payment Amount $ $27,278.00 , 3 Annual in Advance 6.50% 0.354531 $9,670.90 $27,278.00 4 Annual in Advance 6.45% 0.273904 $7,471.55 EXPIRATION DATE: 06/30/2016 This quotation, until credit approved, is not a commitment by Ford Credit Municipal Finance. It has been prepared assuming that the lease qualifies for Federal Income Tax Exempt Status for Ford Credit Company LLC under Section 103 of the IRS Code. Financing is subject to credit review and approval of acceptable documentation by Ford Credit Municipal Finance. Ford Credit Muujolpal Finance Prooram, • There is no security deposit, no prepayment penalty, and no mileage penalty. • At inception, the new equipment title/reglstration indicates the municipality as Registered Owner, with Ford Motor Credit Company LLC as first lien holder. • At term end, the municipality buys the equipment for $1. Thank you for allowing Ford Credit Municipal Finance the opportunity to provide this quotation. If you have any questions regarding the option presented, need additional options, or would like to proceed with the approval process, please contact me at (800) 241-4199, option 1. Sincerely, Evan Pleasant Marketing Coordinator epleasan@ford.com We look forward to assisting you as we have other customers. purchase Fords through Ford Credit as an easy alternative to conventional financing. Good product, good rate, easy process, great support staff" J.J. Randall — Frankfort Park District, 1L 02/27/2015 Ford Motor Credit Company ("FMCC") Is providing the Information contained In this document tor discussion purposes only In connection with a proposed arm', length se..,Ms,<ror renolna transeoton between you and FMCC. FMCC fa acting for Its own Interest and has financial and other Interests that differ from yours. FMCC to not acting as a municipal advisor or financial advisor to you, and has no fiduciary duty to you. The Information provided in this document is not Intended to be and should not be Construed ae "advice" within the meaning of Section 16B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the municipal advisor rules of the SEC. FMCC Is not recommending that you take an action and you should discus, any actions with your own advisors as you deem appropriate. Page 1 of 1 Exhibit "B" ("N, REQUEST FOR MUNICIPAL LEASE QUOTE To: Evan Pleasant Ford Motor Credit Company Municipal Financing 1 American Road -- MD7500 Dearborn, MI 48126 Telephone: 800-241-4199 then press l Fax tt: 313-390-3783 Email: cpleasan(citbrd,com From: Salesman: &w"C C2.de inch e v� Dealership: CIO rh rQN % tt o Q Rce ` Telephone ft: a0E-735--1760 Fax tt: , 023" 785=- i%p1 7 Email: Name of Municipality: f_j City: .-oN0\ Cc) rri etar State: Contact PerahI e f /Ca O L w au. % f Title: h % e. Contact Phone #dia,r� Contact Fax ft: l oNetp6Ll ae= g c r y O Piopek , 0 Rq Does your customer plan on issuing more than SIO million in tax exempt debt during the current fiscal year? ••"• Yes ( ( No ( Quantity Year Equipment Description att 'Tit ALL s =AirerMee pTp rL T; r t .}god.. ADDED EQUIPMENT (Such as: Dump Body. Snow Plow, Spreader or Ford ESP Service, etc) Selling Price (each) $ $ 733 �a If applicable, is Sales fax Included in the above amoE'unts: Ye�►+tis [) N(r)A1 TOTAL AMOUNT FINANCED $ 0id1 733, e� Xt A $425 DOCUNIE:,NTATION FEE IS REQUIRED PER TRA SAC'1'ION, WHICH CAN BE PAID AT DELIVERY OR INC UDED IN THE AMOUNT FINANCED. THIS AMOUNT IS NOT TO BE ADDED INTO YOUR SELLING PRICE. PLEASE INDICATE HOW 'THE DOC FEE IS TO BE PAID: AT DELIVERY [ ] FINANCED [ ] TERM: 2 Years ( ] 3 Yearspq 4 Yearsy0 5 Years [ ] PAYMENT OPTIONS: Monthly [ ] Quarterly [ j Semi -Annual [ ] Annual . DEALER PARTICIPATION ON RATE'? Yes No [ ] 'ryes. how much? /74 (Maximum I%) Comments: