Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-15 Government Operations Committee Minutes � Government Operations Committee � � August 15, 2006 Minutes � Councilor Attendance: Allen, Farrington, Gratwick, Palmer � � Staff Attendance: � Barrett, Winslow � 1. Penobscot Valley Council of Governments " • � General Assembly Nominations � Executive Committee Nominations � 2007-07 Officers' Ballot � Each year, the Cify nominates two representatives to the General Assembly, an � elected official and a staff inemb�r or Planning Board member. The City can also nominate someone for the Executive Committee. Staff recommended Councilor � Allen, who is Past President of PVCOG and has been active in the organization for a number of years, be appointed to the General Assembly and also to serve on the Executive.Committee. StafF also recommends that Stan Moses be appointed � to the General Assembly. The Committee also approved the slate of officers as recommended by staff. A-motion was made and seconded to approve staff s � recommendation. 2. Bangor Daily News Insert— New Bangor Police Station � Winslow indicated that the Committee previously authorized the City to support a BDN supplement on the Bangor Police Department that will focus on the history ' of the department as well as the new headquarters building. This support includes a letter of introduction from the Police Chief to be used as part of the solicitation of sponsors and the cost of the�cover page of the insert. Staff � presented a draft of the letter for its review and action. Under the Ethics Ordinance, approval of the letter by the full Council will also be required since it � � is part of the BDN's solicitation effort: Barrett, Winslow and Gratwick talked about.the ethics involved. The police department employees are.not allowed to solicit. It was recommended that a line be added to the letter indicating that the Police Department, through an agreement with the BDN, will not be informed of . � who is asked to donate. Those who do support will be obvious by placement of their ad.in the insert. Gratwick agreed. Winslow will add language talking about ' the awareness of potential conflict of interest. Allen asked the cost of the supplement. Winslow said the BDN would like-the City to purchase the front cover at $2,500, which has been negotiated down to $1,800, and the amount � � was approved at a past Government Operations Committee. Allen discussed at length an idea of placing historical photos on display near the new police department building during the Folk Festival. Winslow said he will attempt to do ,. so. With the loss of parking spaces available for the Festival, Allen thought a � � � photo display might sof�en the blow. Palmer asked that a group photo be included in the insert. A motion was made and seconded to approve the letter � with the suggested changes. A Council Order will be prepared for the August 28th Council Agenda for full Council action. � 3. Discussion of Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) Barrett had prepared a written discussion paper for the Committee's review. He �� spoke of the November citizen initiative —Taxpayers Bill of Rights — which will appear on the November ballot. He reviewed a discussion paper he had prepared outlining the effects of TABOR on the City of Bangor and a possible �, Council position on the initiative. TABOR sets a spending limit, sets a percentage increase over the prior year's spending that cannot be exceeded without going I through an override procedure. TABOR also requires that any tax or fee increase of any amount also has to go through an override process. The override process requires a 2/3 vote of the City Council and then has to be voted on in a � � referendum by the public. The property tax rate would require the override process. For an example, if BIA wanted to adjust their landing fee it would require the override process. There are two formulas for the spending restriction, � whichever one gives the lower percentage increase. The first formula is a change in assessed value from year to year including both new value and increases market value. The second formula is a consumer price index adjusted by the �, City's change in population from the previous year. Responding to Allen, the southern Maine communities will be able to raise more revenue than Bangor based on population. Bangor's population has been relatively stable since 1950 � � but Bangor is a service center community. Responding to Gratwick, Barrett said � the formula for LD 1 is based on two factors: the real growth in personal�income � in the state and the increase in tax base resulting from new construction, additions to existing properly, subdivision of vacant land, but not market value adjustments to existing properties. If TABOR had been in efFect in FY05/06, � same year that LD 1 became effective, the City's spending, excluding schools, would have been limited to a 2.9% increase based on formula B (cost of living plus the population change). For that year, the CPI increase 3.4% and, � according to the State Planning Office, Bangor's population decreased by a half . percent. That same year, the City's assessed value increased by 8.6%. � Farrington said that Bangor, which is a service center, is losing population but � area towns are experiencing tremendous growth. As a service center, Bangor provides a great deal to the outlying communities. TABOR puts a squeeze on � any service center community. Population is not a good indicator of service demand. Bangor's population is approximately 32,000 and during the daytime hours it doubles or triples. There is large non-profit component in Bangor, all of � which demand service. Therefore, Bangor needs a larger fire department, police department, public works and traffic signals than its population requires. The formula for TABOR is disadvantageous to a service center community. Farrington asked if Colorado has service centers. Barrett said the Colorado � formula is different than Maine's. Colorado's formula is the consumer price index � � lus the local ro e rowth factor. Colorado has a local o tion sales tax as a � P p P rtY 9 P source of revenue. Colorado's revenue is capped. Farrington said that information needs to be made known the general public. � The actual spending for FY06 was budgeted to increase by 6.3%. TABOR would � have caused a reduction in the budget of$1.1 - $1.2M on the City side. Bangor also has Enterprise Funds and the referendum makes no distinction between funds. The Water District may not fall under TABOR. The Airport and the � Treatment Piant would be affected. Portland's]etport would be affected as it also is municipally owned and operated. Barrett didn't feel that the individuals who put TABOR together contemplated various aspects and affects of such a � measure. Responding to Palmer, Barrett said there is nothing in TABOR that makes � Bangor's life easier. Allen said that TABOR is ciearly a reaction against rapidly escalating residential property values. The School Department would be impacted. It would be able to increase its spending limit by 2.92%. Their � formula is based on cost of living plus the change in student population. Responding to Allen, Barrett said that TABOR doesn't restrict the budget but � restricts the actual spending. TABOR also affects bond revenues as well. Allen asked if it is possible to oppose TABOR but to adhere to the public's � concern about the rise in properly taxes. Barrett said there is a spending limit � � plan in place with LD 1, but that it simply hasn't been in place long enough to fully work through the system. The driving problem is the rapidly escalating � value of resident properties in comparison to commercial and industrial properties. At the state level, he spoke of limiting value increase for owner occupied year-round residents. He said a number of states have such systems. � There are a lot of state program to assist properly owners. Farrington expressed concern about taxpayer anger and lack of voter confidence in the government. He stressed that the taxpayers need to be made aware of the affects associated � with TABOR. Maine Municipal Association will be campaigning against TABOR. - � Gratwick spoke about the City becoming pro-active for the issue. � A motion was made and seconded directing the City Manager to prepare a Council. Resolve stating the City's opposing position to TABOR. The Resolve � would appear on an upcoming Council agenda. Farrington suggested that the Resolve make certain to reflect only Bangor's position and the impact of TABOR. � Allen pointed out that Bangor is a service center community and it affects and 1 impacts the outlying areas. Palmer agreed to focus on Bangor but to also recognize the impact on other communities. Farrington suggested the Resolve should reflect Bangor's views as a service center carrying out its obligation to the �� region. Allen spoke about a full Council Workshop on the issue. Barrett said a workshop also is needed on basketball hoops but suggested a possible session prior to a Council meeting. Gratwick agreed and made a motion to ask the City � Manager to prepare a statement for full Council approval before September 1�. � � the August rent. It is well above projection. Palmer supported the efFort but � expressed concern that the City does not raid the racino fund. The City needs a new arena. Hawes agreed with Paimer in keeping a watchful eye on � the fund. She agreed that stafF's recommendation is a part of setting up the racino. A motion was made and seconded to approve staff recommendation to the full Council for its action. Gratwick asked for an update on the City's � paying off of debt and costs incurred for setting up the racino. Cyr said she has not physically transferred the money to reimburse the City but it is in the area of $200,000. Stone asked for an update at the next Finance Committee � meeting. Cyr agreed with the Committee's concerns regarding use of the racino fund but stafF feels this is an item directly tied to the racino. Ft is in compliance with the racino fund policy. As time goes on, Palmer suggested a � new name for the racino fund; i.e. arena fund. Cyr agreed. 4. Resolve, Appropriation for Purpose of Demolishing 53 Charles Street � In March, the City Council adopted an Order condemning the property at this location. That Order directed the owner to secure the property and remove debris within thirty days and to either demolish or renovate the structure � within ninety days. While some initial progress was made on securing, removing debris and renovating the property, this work has stalled and is ' substantially incomplete. It is, therefore, apparent that the current ownership has failed to meet the conditions set forth by the Council and appears unlikely to have the financial resources to do so in the immediate � future. As a result, the City's only option is to proceed with demolition. This Resolve will appropriate the necessary funds for this purpose. After the work is pertormed, the City will place a lien on the property and attempt to recover � the City's costs at some point in the future, however, that recovery is highly unlikely in Cyr's opinion. The City intends to notify the owner and various mortgage holders of the City's intent to proceed to demolish the properly. � The City's intention is to perform this work later this fall. Public Works has prepared a demolition estimate of$30,000. It is possible, however, that the � Fire Department may be able to use this property for a live burn training exercise, an option that would significantly reduce the cost. Since the final demolition option has not been determined the attached Resolve will � appropriate $30,000 for this purpose with language that will return any unspent amount to the Capital Reserve after project completion. Of the $30,000, $5,900 is from the balance of the amount the City received from the � YMCA for 58 Court Street afiter past due sewer bills on that property were paid and the remaining $24,100 will be from the Capital Reserve. A motion was made and seconded to approve staff's recommendation of the Resolve to � the full Council for its final action. 5. Assessor's Update � Birch said he wanted to provide a short update. The Commitment went smoothly on July 7, 2006. The deadline for the abatement request for ' appeals is January 8, 2007. Birch reviewed a memo which he had provided to the Committee with their agenda outlining several key tasks performed 6y the Assessing Department since its last meeting in May with the Finance � � Committee. For the at-home television viewers, Stone asked Birch to review � the process where the Assessment Department can be contacted regarding property valuation, taxes, etc. Cyr and Birch discussed the Homestead Exemption indicating a large number of property owners are eligible but do � not take advantage of this program. Cyr said this is also the case with the Veterans Exemption. Birch stated that the City places ads in the Bangor Daily News in February and March regarding these programs. The City does not � provide a mass mailing to ail Bangor taxpayers. There are 7,500 residential homeowners in Bangor. Birch said there are currently 5,135 Homestead exemptions going to residential homeowners. 133 other properties are fuliy � exempt because of the exemption amount of$13,000. D'Errico said there is � also the Circuit Breaker program. The completed form is mailed to the State which in turns calculates the rebate, if any. It can also be completed online. , Birch reviewed the TIF report and the Downtown Development District. He discussed LD 1796 regarding subsidized housing; LD 1711 dealing with an exemption paraplegic veterans; LD 2056 eliminating the BETR program. i Birch discussed the TABOR bill. 6. Order, Authorizing the Issuance of $655,000 General Obligation t Bonds Cyr explained that the proposed Order would authorize the issuance of ' $655,000 in bonds for the City's annual vehicle replacement program funding. The amount to be issued is in accordance with the City's adopted Fleet Replacement Policy. The bonds will not be issued until the spring of 2007. � Dawes is in the process of preparing a list of vehicles to be replaced. A motion was made and seconded to approve staff's recommendation to the � � full Council. A public hearing is required at the Council meeting. � M 1 � t � r �