Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCM-01-14-04 Special MeetingOffice of the Clerk-Treasurer Cky of Carmel COMMON COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEETING CALLED TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS a. Second Readin~ of Ordinance No. D-1661-03; An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana, Approving a Lease Bet~veen the City of Cannel Redevelopment Authority and the City of Carmel Redevelopment Commission and Addressing Matters Related Thereto; Sponsor: Councilor Kirby b. Second Reading of Ordinance No. D-1679-04; An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana, In Support of the Clay Township Lease-Purchase of 2004; Sponsor: Council President Carter 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. NEW BUSINESS OTHER BUSINESS a. Council Appointments 5. EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2414 CITY OF CARMEL COMMON COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2004 -- 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor James Brainard; Council President Ron Carter; Council Members Pick Sharp, Kevin Kirby, Brian Mayo, Joe Gri£fiths, Fred Glaser and Mark Rattermarm; Clerk-Treasurer Diana Cordray and Deputy Clerk- Treasurer Carrie Gallagher was also present. Mayor Brainard called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. There was no Invocation. Mayor Brainard led the Pledge o£ Allegiance. Mayor Brainard read aloud a letter recently received by the Hamilton County Board of Commissioners concerning services provided to West Clay Township and revenue received from that area. Mayor Brainard recommended that the County be permitted to retain those dollars for the year and continue services contingent upon an agreement to complete several roads and improvements projects COMMITTEE REPORTS: Council President Carter reported that the Finance, Administration and Rules Committee met on January 13, 2004, at which time the Committee reviewed and recommended the approval of Ordinance No. D-1661-04 to Council. There was no report by the Land Use, Annexation and Economic Development Committee this evening. Councilor Sharp reported that the Parks, Recreation and Arts Committee met on January 8, 2004, at which time the Committee reviewed and recommended the approval of Ordinance No. D-1679-04 to Council by a unanimous vote of 3-0. There was no report by the Utilities, Transportation and Public Safety Committee this evening. OLD BUSINESS: Council President Carter announced the Second Reading of Ordinance No. D~1661-03; An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana, Approving a Lease Between the City of Carmel Redevelopment Authority and the City of Carmel Redevelopment Commission and Addressing Matters Related Thereto. Councilor Kirby presented this matter to Council and outlined several concerns within the document. Mayor Brainard addressed those concerns expressed by Council. Councilor Sharp commented 1 on behalf of District One and recommended approval of this matter to Council in consideration of improvements to be made to his area of representation. Council discussion continued. Ordinance No. D- 1661-03 was approved by a vote of 7-0. Council President Carter announced the Second Reading of Ordinance No. D-1679-04; An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana, In Support of the Clay Township Lease-Purchase of 2004. Council President Carter summarized this matter to Council and advised that all requests to speak regarding this item will be heard at this point. The following persons addressed Council in favor of this matter, unless otherwise specified below: Tom Rumer of 148 Winon Drive; Jack L. Edwards of 10475 Cornell Street; Lila Chiappetta of 12959 Brighton Avenue; Mary Eckard of 136 Lantern Lane, Clay Township Board Member, expressed concern regarding the financial burden to the City/Township and requested Council to initiate additional research and study prior to their approval of this item; Doreen Squiare Ficara of 776 Hawthorne Drive; Tom Wilson of 226 Pam Road; Jim Dillon of 507 Cornwall Court; Jim Rosensteele of 3032 Rollshore Court; Dan Dutcher of 11583 Sutton Place Drive; Jamie Moore of 9302 Barecrof~ Drive; Tim Tolson of 110 Shoshone Drive; Sue Maki of 1300 Helford Lane; Paul Siddens of 11547 Woodview West Drive; Marvin Pike of 10868 Cornell; Debbie Winchester of 13881 Shelborne Road; Gary Doxtater of 13559 Kensington Place; Ashley Landwerlen of 13324 Kickapoo Trail; Nick Holub of 1516 Brookmill Court; John Gaylor of 524 Cedar Lake Court; Sam Laska of 3142 Hazel Foster Drive; Michael Payne of 12101 Windpointe Pass; David M. Landis of 2047 East 110th Street; Brian Shapiro of 4610 Woodhaven; Kim R. Downing of 3115 Hensel Drive; 2 Seeing no one else who wished to speak, Council President Carter introduced Mark Westermeier, Interim Director of the Carmel/Clay Parks Department, to provide a formal presentation of this matter to Council. Mr. Westermeier then introduced Jim Engledow, Vice-President of the Parks Board who introduced and provided a little background on the key people of this project: Brian Bosma, Attorney for Kroger, Gardis & Regas; Steve Baker, President of Summit Construction; Alan Armstrong, Owner of AJ Armstrong; David Hall; and Mike Keater with Crowe Chizek. Council President Carter called the meeting to recess at 9:35 p.m. Council President Carter reconvened the meeting at 9:41 p.m. Council President Carter turned this matter over to Council for individual comments. Councilor Rattermann expressed concern with the cost and economic impact on the City/Township and advised that he may support'a scaled-down version of this project; however, as presented, he will not vote in favor at this time. Councilor Glaser also expressed concern for the cost of the project and indicated that he may support consideration of a reduced bond amount. Councilor Griffiths expressed issue with the cost as well as the size of the community center. Councilor Mayo advised of his strong feelings for the project and what it has to offer the community. He suggested that the Park be built as projected as it will only cost more in the future if all or part of the plans are held off until a later time. Councilor Kirby was also concerned with the size of the community center compared to the cost and advised that he supports the project completely, but will only consider a reduction in the project estimate in consideration of the substantial, additional debt to be --taken on by the City in the near future. Councilor Sharp expressed full support of the proposed project as presented and feels ~he dynamic growth in this City supports substantial projects such as this one. He stated that the present economy presents an ideal opportunity to fund this project at this time. Mayor Brainard addressed tax impact concerns expressed by Council and responded to individual concerns such as the size of the community center and the cost impact. Finally, Council President Carter commented on this matter, stating that he also feels that now is the best time to pursue this project both economically and fiscally. He advised that he is in full support of this matter and secure in the projections and estimates of the professional consultants. Therefore, Councilor Mayo moved to approve Ordinance No. D-1679-04. Councilor Sharp seconded. The motion FAILED by a vote of 3-4. Councilors Kirby, Griffiths, Glaser and Rattermann voted in the opposition. Councilor Kirby moved to consider an amendment to the bond amount, not to exceed $49,000,000.00. Councilor Glaser seconded. Councilor Sharp, as Parliamentarian, advised that a motion to reconsider must first be presented. Councilor Kirby moved to withdraw his previous motion and, thereby, moved to reconsider Ordinance No. D-1679-04. Councilor Griffiths seconded the motion to withdraw and to reconsider. The motion was approved 7-0. Councilor Kirby then moved to amend the bond amount, not to exceed $49,000,000.00. Councilor Glaser seconded. Immediately following, Councilor Sharp moved to amend the motion to amend by Councilor Kirby by amending the bond amount, not to exceed $55,000,000.00. There was Council discussion concerning which motion to consider. Councilor Sharp advised, as parliamentarian, that since his motion is -- to amend the motion proposed by Councilor Kirby, then his later motion to amend is presently on the table for Council consideration. The motion to amend the bond amount from, "not to exceed $49,000,000.00" to "not to exceed $55,000,000.00" was approved by a vote of 4-3. Councilors Kirby, Glaser and Rattermann voted in the opposition. Ordinance No. D-1679-04 was approved, as amended, 4-3. Councilors Kirby, Glaser and Rattermann voted in the opposition. PUBLIC HEARINGS: There were none. NEW BUSINESS: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENTS: There were none. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Brainard moved to adjourn, pending the execution of documents. 10:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, The meeting was adjourned at Clerk-Treasurc~'l~)~a L. CO'tray, I~MC Approved, f~a~orCfames Brainard ATTEST: Clerk-Treasurer Diana L. Cordray, IAMC 1/I4/04 SCC Minutes 4 Subject: Central Park Funding, Carmel-Clay Community The people of the Carmel-Clay Community have an opportunity to invest in something great for the community. I am talking about the Central Park endeavor. Let us not hesitate to fund and accomplish the entire project. We need to step up to the challenge and fund it fully. Don't under fund this effort. Central Park, by its location is unique, being nearly the geographical center of Clay Township. The Monon trail goes through the heart of Central Park, providing access to park facilities via walking, biking, etc... without adding to the high level of road traffic. We have a good foundation for doing such an investment in our community. We have had tremendous growth in the past several years and expect the continuation of such growth for an extended period of time. The endeavor being talked about here is one of the many reasons that people want to live in this community and that sustains growth, increased taxpayer base, and lower tax rates. This growth has provided us with the lowest tax rate in Hamilton County. That is why I refer to the funding of Central Park as an investment. The growth, larger taxpayer base, low tax rate has allowed the community to make outstanding improvements like the Carmel-Clay Parks system. So, We have growth; past, present, and projected future. We have more people expecting good facilities for their tax monies and a broad taxpayer base to fund good facilities, a good combination. We need to proceed with confidence and enthusiasm and produce an outstanding facility with Central Park. Please do not under fund the Central Park effort. Under funding will only cost us more in the long run and not meet adequately the expectations of the taxpayers. Jack L. Edwards (Home Place, Indiana) CITY COUNCIL FINANCIAL CONCERNS My name is Mary Eckard and I am an elected member of the Clay Township Board. We, like you, have been asked to review and vote on the proposed $59 million dollar bond issue for the construction of Central Park. Unlike the City Council, the Township Board does not have the financial resources available to it to hire consultants which can help it make informed decisions on fiscal matters. I feel there are some questions and research needed before we all vote on the $59 million dollar bond for the construction of Central Park. I am looking to you, as the fiscal body of the City of Carmel, for help. While we are all supportive of the creation of a wonderful parks system, my concern is for the overall debt load that we are incurring on behalf of the citizens of Carmel and Clay Township. Fiscal decisions that we make impact the taxpayer. Bonds that we approve appear on property tax bills for payment. While parks are certainly a priority with many taxpayers, when it comes to choosing where to spend public dollars, these choices are not made in a vacuum. As I understand it... this is the community's booding situation: * The Carmel Clay Schools have recently bonded for two bonds, one for $130 million and an additional bond for $30 million more. (Source: Barbara Underwood, Superintendent of Schools) * The City Council approved $10.4 million last year for the street maintenance facility and is currently considering an additional $35 million for road construction. * Clay Township (including the city of Carmel) is now proposing this $59 million bond for Central Park. That is a total of $264 million in indebtedness that either has been approved recently or is under active consideration. Other projects under discussion such as: * $70 million for the City Center project, * Roads needed in the large C-260 ~nnexation area, 1/14/2004 (over) * Keystone Avenue projects, and the * Purchase of Water Lines are not included in this total. I feel that we cannot make a decision for a $59 million bond without knowing the total impact on the taxpayers for all these bonds. Once we know that... I feel we must give this information to the public and be open to an alternate plan. In the presentations I've heard from the Park Board, I've heard nothing about bids. How can we borrow $59 million, if we don't have solid bids for each component of the project? How is this $59 million to be spent? On which projects first? Can revenue generating projects be completed first? Can we break this into 2 or 3 bonds to ease the financial impact? Although these are all different entities making the decision to borrow, ultimately the taxpayer will see it on their property tax bill. I feel that I cannot make a decision like this in a vacunm... I need to know that total impact on the taxpayers. I feel we as elected officials need to let the public know the cost to them. So... my question for you is simply this... Will you do the research and tell all of us, the taxpayers, just how much each household will have added to their bills from ALL of these boodlng sources? What is the tax implication on a $200,000 house, a $350,000 house and so forth? You are the fiscal body'-~ You can do the research and have a televised venue in which to get out the information. I am asking you to tell the homeowners and business owners of Carmel and Clay Township what they should know; and what I need to know about what will appear on their tax bill as a result of our decisions; before the vote takes place for the $59 million bond.