My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-19-16 Utilities
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Committee Meeting Minutes
>
2016
>
Utilities
>
05-19-16 Utilities
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2017 10:58:48 AM
Creation date
6/13/2016 11:06:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
exemptions that are in this proposed bill because many of these big large projects like Lippert are <br />reconnections and there would be no assessment fee. <br />Councilmember Jo M. Broden arrived at 5:58 p.m. <br />Michael BLANK stated that if you look at these exemptions in the proposed bill, they would take <br />out the majority of the cases where we would have higher assessment fees than South Bend and <br />Mishawaka. <br />Councilmember John Voorde asked under what situation would the Redevelopment Commission <br />grant these exemptions. <br />Mr. Horvath responded his thought was that if TIF dollars are used to extend water and sewer to <br />entice a business to come in there is the flexibility to include that as part of the deal for these <br />potential businesses. It would be part of the larger economic package. <br />Committeemember Dr. Fred Ferlic asked if Mishawaka does that with their Redevelopment <br />Commission. <br />Mr. Horvath responded he does not know. <br />Chairperson Dr. Varner opened up the meeting for public input on the proposed bill. <br />Bill Schalliol, St. Joseph County Economic Director, thanked the Committee for the opportunity <br />to speak on the bill. The building community and the County understand it takes money to run a <br />utility to a property and that also in the coming years there will be challenges towards the circuit <br />breaker imposed by the state in 2019. They also understand this is an ordinance already on the <br />books. With that being said, with this ordinance there are some things he has concerns about the <br />disparity of the rates for development within the City and development in non - incorporated areas <br />or towns like New Carlisle which has South Bend sewer. He asked if the new sewer schedule is <br />the same. <br />Mr. Horvath responded it is the exact same. <br />Mr. Schalliol asked the way he looks at it, the new schedule would be more expensive. Mr. <br />Schalliol provided a handout with his concerns to the Committee which is on file in the City <br />Clerk's Office. The question has been raised how does the assessment rate affect existing <br />projects. The Fed Ex project under the revised ordinance would pay $83,000. The Pepsi Project <br />would pay about $52,000 and the City and Commissioner building would pay $71,000. The <br />General Sheet Metal project, which is just outside the City limits, would pay a one hundred and <br />ten (I 10) percent multiplier because it is not in the City limits and hasn't signed a waiver for <br />annexation would pay $83.000 for its assessment. The St. Joseph Engery Center in New Carlisle <br />would pay the one hundred and ten (110) percent multiplier for a total of $349,027.25. Again this <br />is already in the ordinance, but in the spirit of regionalism we should look at this. The waiver <br />also provides a quid pro quo situations because what happens when an owner does not want to <br />sign the annexation waiver of if there is no reasonably semblance of contiguity or adjacent to <br />in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.