City Council and RDA Notes 11.14.06 Part One
By Dian Woodhouse
Tonight's meeting dealt with so many issues that any one of them would provide a day of discussion material. Furthermore, the format of the meeting involved the Council switching back and forth from Council business to RDA business and also one closed executive session. The Peterson issue is important, I agree. But some of these other issues will have equally far-reaching effects on Ogden City. Too many issues that deserve time and coverage have been put on the back burner in order to discuss the Peterson project, and these things need coverage too.
Therefore, the first item of interest was the West 12th Street Economic Development Project Area. We have discussed this complex situation before. Fresenius is expanding, and the idea is to sell them the property which is currently used to park and maintain the school buses. A new bus facility will be built (by us,) and the school bus facility will be moved to it. We will then sell the property to Fresenius, which has been very good to us, the presentation said, in the way of investing in the area and providing jobs.
In order to make the Fresenius expansion happen, the Project Area Budget had to be amended and the Project Area itself reconfigured, which was the subject of proposed RDA Resolution 2006-16. It was stated in Dave Harmer's superior power point presentation that the state had been approached for money to help with this, which it had granted, and also that Fresenius had been talking with North Carolina about locating there. Here's where it gets tricky.
This issue required Council action authorizing the RDA to issue and sell up to $6,750,000 in tax increment revenue bonds and to allow it to purchase property. As these things required Council action, they happened in a different part of the evening's events. They all passed, by the way. What came next chronologically after the presentation was public comment.
No one from Fresenius was present.
The first speaker, a Mr. Aaron(?) stated that "What's happening is great for Utah, great for Ogden, great for everybody except those who live on Gibson Avenue." He went on to state that the residents had received a letter that informed them that their properties would undergo increased valuation, and that there was no reason at all to raise the property taxes in that area because of this Fresenius expansion. "These taxes will go up and we want to know why," he said. "We said in the Pledge of Allegiance that there will be justice. There is no justice. Will someone please explain why they are raising my taxes?"
Virginia Hernandez then spoke regarding Hispanic families in the area, and stated that "These people should be informed properly" so that they could voice their opinions.
The next speaker had lived in the area 34 years and owns two acres. She had already undergone a large tax hike, was on a fixed income, and did not want to sell her property. "I raised my children there. I like it there." Stating that she was a member of the Nature Center, she said that her property also provided habitat for birds. "I want to save that little sanctuary," she said. "(They will) mow everything down--the green is gone--Let them leave me alone until I die."
Here Mr. Harmer stated soothingly that their property taxes shouldn't be affected, that the County Assessor valued property, and that actions regarding Fresenius had nothing to do with it. Councilwoman Jeske suggested that perhaps the increase they had already seen was from another source, the School District, for instance. "The tax increase is not from us," she stated.
The public hearing closed, and there was more discussion. Councilman Stephens said that, "We need to be conscious of these individuals who are on a fixed income." and it was reiterated by Mr. Harmer that "We're not doing anything to change the tax rate."
At this point, a portion of the letter the residents had received from the city was quoted by one of the speakers. It said:
"...resulting from an increase in valuation of property within the proposed project area."
"That's us," he said.
Mr. Harmer agreed that the wording of this led one to believe that those taxes would go up because of this project, but implied that this would not be the case. Proposed Resolution #2006-16 passed. The residents and Mr. Harmer continued discussion in the hall.
A copy of the Resolution was not available. If the wording from the letter is present in the Resolution, it would follow that those residents will indeed experience an increase in their taxes as a result of this project, even though they were verbally assured that this increase would not be a result of the project.
Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment