My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2021 03 09 SP
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2021 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2021 03 09 SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:15:47 PM
Creation date
4/7/2021 10:25:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
3/9/2021
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 9, 2021 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />revenue. After that a new sales tax, property tax, or transportation fee could be <br />considered. She reviewed some possible funding scenarios. <br />Staff is asking the Council for direction on if they would like to see further exploration of a <br />transportation tax question on the 2021 ballot; how much funding to consider; what <br />projects should be funded; and what tax option to consider. <br />Public Comments — None. <br />Mayor Pro Tern Maloney stated he would prefer to fund the projects as we build them <br />rather than ask for an additional tax. <br />Mayor Stolzmann stated the TMP had many projects that are amenities that our residents <br />have asked for time and time again but that we cannot fund. As residents have asked for <br />these projects it makes sense to ask if they are willing to fund them. At a minimum we <br />should ask staff to look into bonding against existing revenue to pay for these items but <br />also continue a discussion of a potential property tax to fund additional projects on the list. <br />We should continue the discussion to narrow the field on what options would be possible. <br />Councilmember Brown agreed we should keep looking into this as we continue to get <br />requests from residents for these projects. <br />Councilmember Lipton would like to continue the pay as you go approach but is also <br />intrigued by the idea of bonding against existing revenue. If we are going to go to the <br />ballot we should spend more money on getting better cost estimates on projects so we <br />know how much to ask residents to fund. He does not think we have enough information <br />to go for a 2021 ballot issue. <br />Councilmember Brown suggested looking at existing revenue but also looking at a ballot <br />issue to pay for some additional projects, but not all of them. <br />The consensus was for staff to get additional information on bonding against existing <br />revenue and look at what a new property tax question might look like depending on the <br />project grouping (a package for Highway 42 improvements and one for underpasses). <br />Councilmember Fahey would like more information on what projects may qualify for <br />matching funds. <br />Mayor Pro Tern Maloney noted that if the Council chooses the property tax route it means <br />the local businesses may pay significantly more than residents so we need to keep that in <br />mind if that is the way we decide to go. <br />APPROVAL OF A REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES TO <br />DEVELOP UPDATES FOR THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY ZONING REGULATIONS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.