|
REGULAR MEETING September 11, 2017
<br /> Those wishing to speak in opposition to this bill:
<br /> Will Smith, 728 White Hall Drive, South Bend, IN, stated, I speak opposed to it, particularly the
<br /> language that's inside of it. I would like to see the Council send a message that we would like an
<br /> economic impact analysis completed before the funds are committed. Everyone talks kind of
<br /> about the bang for the buck, and, "This is great economics!" Yet, we haven't studied anything,
<br /> yet. Do we really know what benefit that's going to bring? Kind of the basics of transportation
<br /> economics in that analysis is finding out if the benefits are double-counted. Double track? That
<br /> sounds like a double count to me.
<br /> Councilmember Davis stated that he agrees with Mr. Smith that an economic impact study be
<br /> completed before funds are committed to the project. Upon asking where in the resolution this
<br /> request should be added, Mr. Smith proposed to Councilmember Davis that a fourth bullet point
<br /> should be added to the text with that request. Several members of the Council agreed.
<br /> Councilmember Scott asked James Mueller, Can you just quickly summarize where is NICTD,
<br /> the County, the State, the Federal Government—where are we in the entire process, right now?
<br /> Just to kind of clarify and set where the stake is in the ground, right now.
<br /> James Mueller, Executive Director of the Department of Community Investment, with offices on
<br /> the 14th Floor of the County-City Building, South Bend, IN, stated, As part of the resolution, you
<br /> cited the Federal Uniform Relocation Act, and part of that will require them to go through the
<br /> National Environmental Protection Act—called NEPA. By doing this, you evaluate a number of
<br /> alternatives, look at all the impacts, throw out the ones with the biggest impact, and hone in on
<br /> the alternative that has the least impacts. One (1) alternative that's required everything in the
<br /> NEPA process is a no-action alternative—so, not doing it. And by doing so,that will be one (1)
<br /> alternative that's evaluated—you know,the impacts relative to the other. It's called an
<br /> Environmental Assessment, if it's a shorter process; it's called an Environmental Impact
<br /> Statement—an EIS—if it's a longer statement and the impacts are greater. It's kind of a
<br /> misnomer to call it"environmental"because they look at everything from noise, human impacts,
<br /> to economic impacts. So,this will be done as part of the departments under the federal law. So,
<br /> getting to Councilman Davis's question on language, if it's restricted to no funds spent on
<br /> construction,there still needs to be funds for studies or other things. If you wanted to do no
<br /> funds on construction of the line before an impact study, that ought to be sufficient because it's
<br /> going to get done, anyway.
<br /> Councilmember Davis stated, You understand what he's talking about? Are we clear with that?
<br /> There are some things we have to have funding for in order to get some understanding. So,to not
<br /> have any funding to get an understanding puts us in the dark. So, we have to have some funding
<br /> released so we can get a better understanding is what I think that's what you're trying to tell me.
<br /> Mr. Mueller responded, Yes.
<br /> Councilmember Davis addressed Council Attorney Bob Palmer, asking him to read the amended
<br /> language he drafted.
<br /> Bob Palmer, Council Attorney, with offices on the 4th Floor of the County-City Building, South
<br /> Bend, IN, stated, I would suggest a separate bullet point to the effect of: "No TIF funds for
<br /> construction will be committed until such time that an economic impact analysis is performed
<br /> and made available to the public."
<br /> Councilmember Davis stated that the Council will present a cover letter to the Redevelopment
<br /> Commission on Thursday September 28th, 2017.
<br /> Councilmember Broden asked if there were any way for the Council to change the agenda to
<br /> have the letter sent the Thursday of this week, instead.
<br /> Mr. Mueller responded, We have an internal draft agenda for Thursday, but we have not made
<br /> public notice for that, yet, so there is an opportunity to add a late addition, if the Council desires
<br /> to have it this Thursday.
<br /> 11
<br />
|