Showing posts with label Tax Increase. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tax Increase. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 17, 2020

Recap! City Council 6.16.202

This meeting's agenda only had 2 items on it, which gave the council some time to dig in a little deeper on it.  I thought it was a great meeting and very informative!

You can watch the meeting here, or by clicking below.  You can see the packet and agenda here

•Covid 19 update: Mayor Jo reported that the hospital rate for Davis County has gone down slightly to 73%.  We want this number to below 90%.  Rates for unemployment for Davis County have also decreased.  Travel cases of Covid are down, but work related cases are up.  Of those that have been tested for the antibodies, only 2% have shown immunity.

•We had 2 comments from the public that took place at city hall.

The council took some time to respond to the comments.  Councilman Wayne Winsor addressed some questions about the fire department numbers and relayed some information he was able to obtain since last week's meeting:  In the last 18 months, the SW Fire Department had responded to 450-460 calls, 25 were outside of our jurisdiction.  17 calls were from other municipalities responding for help to South Weber, all were for fire but 3.  Mutual aid agreements for fire response with other cities does not bring in revenue, but any ambulance care we do charge for those services.   South Weber has a full time fire department; that means our FD is staffed 24/7, however we do not have full time employees.  Normal rotation is to have 2 people at the station at all times, which equates to an average hourly wage of approximately $23.17.  There are times there are more people there for training purposes.

Certified Tax Rate: The council approved to adopt the Certified Tax Rate. Adopting this rate means we will not be having a tax increase.  We are expected to bring in the same amount of taxes as we did in the 2019 year, plus some for new growth.  There was a comment made by Councilman Winsor to take notice how much the inflation has caused the rate to adjust already.  He cautioned against waiting another 30 years to catch back up to the rate (the longer we wait, the higher the percentage of the increase will be to catch back up to the rate).  You can learn more about how this work here if you feel so inclined.  :-)

Adopt FY 2021 budget and consolidated fee schedule:  I took some time to go over some of the highlights of the budget and answer questions that have been raised.
•In this years budget there was an increase in garbage fees and sewer fees.  The city will be absorbing both those costs and not passing it on to citizens.
•The city is able to keep up to 25% in our general fund as a savings account (rainy day fund).  The city works to keep it close to that range.
•The budget indicates a $900,000 to upgrade a sewer trunk line.  This is due to an indication from our Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) done in 2014 that a line would need to be updated to remain sufficient.  The CFP will be done again as soon as the General Plan is adopted and updated to reflect growth.  However, since the discussion on sewer updates that happened last year, we have been metering our sewer to better determine capacity. It is possible that we can remain sufficient without upgrading this sewer line.  In the even that we are at capacity as is, this line will not be upgraded.  However, the $900,000 will need to stay in the sewer fund and can not be transferred back into the general fund as it was acquired through impact fees.  
•The budget indicated $327,000 will be transferred to the capital projects plan to reimburse from monies received for SBD.  Staff will get the information on how much money we have received thus far to reimburse for SBD, and the amounts that is still to be collected.
• The question was raised from public comment why the city is having to buy property for a new Public Works building and why the amount of $700,000.  The answer was that the current facilities and location of the public works buildings are out of code.  We are unable to do proper clean up and have room for needed storage as well as a new public works building on that lot.  The goal is to find a property that has adequate space, is not in the back yard of residents, and we would not need to build a road too.  It is hoped that we will not need to use the full amount set aside.  If we are able to do so for less, those funds will go back into the budget.
•I also requested that the $35,000 budgeted new auto/lift, auto/load gurney for the Fire Department have a freeze put in place until the Public Safety Committee is able to address the questions that have come up.  That committee will meet next week and will have more information at the next council meeting.

New Business:

Councilmember Winsor requested that quarterly department reports in public meetings and the information that is shared be brought back to the table.  It was the decided the PR committee will decide how to engage those types of conversations again.

•The open house schematics were brought up.  Based on the newest guidelines, we are able to meet as long as social distancing (now called physical distancing) is maintained and property sanitization is maintained.  Some members of the Planning Commission did not feel comfortable coming to the meeting, however the council was comfortable being there.  The open house will take place at the Family Activity Center on June 24th and 25th.

Reports:
Mayor Jo reported they met with the new contracted lawyers for land and property use and felt optimistic about them representing the city.

•Councilman Halverson reported the Planning Commission reviewed a presentation for the Stephen's property.  He also added the PC hopes to review and amend city codes starting next month.  If there are codes you would like to see reviewed, please reach out to the Planning Commission.

•Dave Larsen reported the wetlands restoration is underway and large piles of dirt will be accumulating on the west end of Canyon Meadows park.  He has not been able to make contact with those who took some part of responsibility in dumping the fill dirt there yet.  He will continue to work on it.

And that's a wrap! I hope you will all make sure to take a moment and participate in the general plan survey!


Monday, September 23, 2019

2019 City Retreat & South Bench Drive

Every year in January, our city staff, our city council and all members of the planning commission meet for 2 days to discuss what has been accomplished the previous years, items still in process, goals to look forward too and other concerns or issues.  

The January 2019 retreat is an interesting one to listen to. There are many great things being discussed and there are lots of great conversations. I would recommend listening to it, it is very insightful.

That being said, there is more discussion and information about South Bench Drive. I am going to summarize some of the things I found that I feel is good to be aware of.
Here is the outline of the retreat and what I'm focusing on.




In audio 1, about minute 53:30-55:00 City Engineer Brandon Jones is talking about South Bench Drive. He states:
“Old fort road...that kind of grew and developed and with the support of the city and the council to be renamed South Bench Drive. We’ve worked on a new alignment with that. In conjunction with that, in order to get some funding we needed to be functionally classified with UDOT and the state, so we went through that process and I was happy to see – they typically don’t classify a new road unless they feel fairly confident that it will actually happen - but if you get on UDOT’s maps it is actually functionally classified all the way from 84 up the hill and connecting over into Layton so I think that’s a big win.

"...As I mentioned we have turned in a few funding requests Davis county prop 1 money we are still hopeful that we will get what we requested and then just last week we turned in for two different projects for South Bench drive, one at the at the new intersection on South Weber Drive (where SBD and SWD meet) and one for the section that would go up the hill - some of the more costly portions of the project so this would be with Wasatch Regional Council. This would be federal money...when you have a project that big that is usually where you have to go.”


Mayor Jo reported in a September meeting that they received Prop 1 funds for SBD phase 1. I am not sure if they got the federal funds they were seeking. But once again - these funds are going to a PROPOSED road. In 2014, the road to Layton was very nearly removed entirely from the general plan. However, it was added back in on two conditions: it could only move forward if it could be done at an 8% grade and if it was changed from a collector road to a **local** road. At this point in the process of this retreat, there still had not been ANY public involvement. Very few in the city even knew about it.

The retreat later goes on to add ideas they want to see happen within in the city. On the attached screenshot, you can see all their ideas.  SBD in some form or other comes up several different times. They are then directed to check mark their personal top 5.  Those top priorities are then listed, SBD being number 4.


In audio 2, at minute 1:20:00 a discussion takes place about the huge opportunity if we could having tying into a north gate on HAFB. The amount of growth of jobs on HAFB, the safety and egress this would bring to South Weber, and the commercial opportunity of annexing the slopes of Layton in conjunction are all discussed.

While I am glad that we have a council working together and exploring options and having discussions about the potential of our city, and while I absolutely have to give them credit for the synergy of the group, what I am so disappointed about is that their constituents-we the people- knew nothing about any of it. How many random citizens would listen to 2.5 hours of audio to hear how the retreat went? Probably 1 in 7,500. But how many of us desperately want our voice heard when it comes to these major decisions? I think all of us! I feel that to some degree, that they may have forgotten that they are here to represent us, not make decisions for us. I feel that if they remembered that aspect, they would have actively invited us to participate in the process, let us know what is going on and communicated it to us, like the many other things they have done that on. It is getting frustrating to me to have them tell us things like "this won't be a major road" "this is decades away" "this won't even get passed" only to find out through digging and searching they are actively working on making it a possibility, and not only that, it most definitely is intended to be a major road! The biggest problem I see here isn't even the road, the problem is their lack of involving the public. I'm going to say that one more time so that I'm not misunderstood.....The biggest problem I see here isn't even the work on the road, the biggest problem is their lack of involving the public.

Those of course, are just my thoughts. What are yours?


P.S. Not to make a long post longer, but if you're interested in jumping down another rabbit hole, property tax and the new public works building (estimated at 5.5 million) is discussed on audio 2 minute 1:55. Spoiler alert - property tax wasn't even added to the board of ideas, and it wasn't brought up by any of our elected officials.