Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Louisville City Council Meeting <br />November 19, 2002 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Mayer agreed a poll at this time would not be appropriate and the recreation fees should <br />be reviewed. He suggested the size of the bond issue be analvzed and reevaluated for <br />future elections. He stressed the importance of listening to the citizens and operating in <br />their best interest. <br /> <br />REGULAR BUSINESS <br /> <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1404, SERIES 2002 - AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND <br />REENACTING CHAPTER 3.18 OF THE LOUISVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE. TO <br />ESTABLISH NEW DEVELOPMENT IMP ACT FEES - 2nd reading - public <br />hearing (advertised Daily Camera 11/10/02) <br /> <br />Davidson called for City Attorney presentation. <br /> <br />City Attorney Sam Light read Ordinance No. 1404, Series 2002. <br /> <br />Davidson reported the Impact Fee Study is not complete. The City Attorney suggests <br />that Council, by motion, take no further action on Ordinance No. 1404, Series 2002. as <br />submitted on 2nd reading. This would require a new 151 and 2nd reading. <br /> <br />MOTION: Davidson moved that Council take no further action on Ordinance No. 1404, <br />Series 2002" seconded by Brown. <br /> <br />Keany stated he did not have a problem delaying the reenactment of the ordinance, <br />however questioned collection of the current fees. <br /> <br />Davidson agreed the current fee should be adjusted temporarily and requested that the <br />City Attornc:y review and advise Council as to the options. <br /> <br />VOTE: All in favor. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1407, S]~RIES 2002 - AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING <br />LODGING EXCISE TAXES -2nd reading - public hearing (advertised Daily <br />Camera 11/10/02 <br /> <br />Davidson called for City Attorney presentation. <br /> <br />City Attorney Sam Light read Ordinance No. 1407, Series 2002. Light noted the <br />ordinance has second reading amendments. <br /> <br />Finance Director Charlene Laus reviewed Ordinance No. 1407, Series 2002, concerning <br />the City's Lodging Excise Tax, and explained the lodging tax is 3.0%, effective January <br />1,2003. She reviewed a second n~ading amendment, which removes the registration of <br />the lodging tax, as it duplicates the business registration. Laus stated the projected <br />revenue for the lodging tax is $250,000, and restricted for Council's determination. <br /> <br />3 <br />