|
REGULAR MEETING April 22, 2019
<br /> This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bills, proponents and
<br /> opponents were given an opportunity to be heard.
<br /> Judith Rubleske, 515 South Meade Street, South Bend, IN, stated, Good evening. Happy Dyngus
<br /> Day and Earth Day! A double header today. This is a seven(7) year abatement. How much money
<br /> are we talking about that will be abated over seven (7) years? Because, you know, we have a big
<br /> poverty population in South Bend. I heard fifty-four percent (54%) of households just don't have
<br /> enough money to get by. They live week to week. And then we have a lot of people that are really
<br /> in poverty level besides that. So, I think we need to start thinking of abatements from the tax payers
<br /> that are here in the City not as the tax payers are investors providing this abatement, or
<br /> stakeholders. We need to think of us being bankers and ask for some collateral. Are there some
<br /> stipulations? I would like to know about those with this contract for abatement. So, if it's a seven
<br /> (7) year abatement,maybe one seventh(1/7)of the amount is put up as collateral. Just like bankers
<br /> do. Or, they did when I worked in a bank. I worked at St. Joe Bank here in downtown. Then, after
<br /> one (1) year, if they haven't met the contract guidelines they were supposed to meet, they have to
<br /> give up that collateral deposit kind of thing. So, that is my suggestion.
<br /> Mary Ellen O'Connell, 129 West North Shore Drive, South Bend, IN, stated, I also teach
<br /> international environmental law at Notre Dame's Law School. I'm here because it's Earth Day and
<br /> I'm really puzzled and disappointed to see that the City,when we are about to consider a resolution
<br /> against climate change, that we would give up our tax dollars for a project that is certainly not part
<br /> of the green economy. It is a part of old tech. Diesel truck engines. I would rather see our funds go
<br /> to support training in the green economy. Also, this description of this beautiful new facility has
<br /> asphalt, which is a greenhouse gas emitted substance. We have so many brown space areas
<br /> throughout the City. That would be at least one (1) in favor of using our tax dollars to redevelop
<br /> already blighted sites. This is not a green project and I oppose it as a tax payer and as somebody
<br /> who is very interested in seeing the health of our City expand. Whenever you say job retainment,
<br /> job expansion, people say yes. But, it's time in 2019, with climate change at a life-threatening
<br /> level, to say no to old tech and yes to green projects. It will really move the City. It will be a
<br /> contradiction, of sorts, to try and support a resolution to combat climate change if tax dollars are
<br /> abated for this project. Thank you.
<br /> The petitioners were given five(5)minutes for a rebuttal.
<br /> Mr.Buckenmeyer stated,Really briefly,to answer some of the first(1St)questions,they were about
<br /> the investments, commitments and so on. So, the way tax abatements work, there really isn't a net
<br /> loss. It is a net gain. If we consider doing nothing in this situation, over the next ten (10) years,
<br /> These properties are currently paying roughly $6,500 a year in taxes. So, looking out to the ten
<br /> (10) years, that is $65,000 added to the tax rolls. If we enable this project, if we help them invest
<br /> and grow in South Bend, it will actually add $2 million of taxes during that same ten (10) year
<br /> period. So, this is not a loss, it is an absolute gain, and an impressive one (1). Again, there were
<br /> questions and comments about folks in poverty and so on, and I think there is arguably no better
<br /> way to raise folks up than to increase the number of available jobs. These are opportunities for
<br /> folks to get training at a training facility for the type of jobs we are talking about here. They are
<br /> very good paying jobs and it will help raise our median household income levels. I can't punish a
<br /> company for locating on a highway where all of our trucks,the way they are today, are driving by.
<br /> We all want a greener economy and I am certain they will evolve as the market evolves. But today,
<br /> I think they are doing a great job of servicing those vehicles that are out there and are passing our
<br /> community every day. That brings that income into our community.
<br /> Council President Tim Scott announced,Today,these are two(2) confirming resolutions.Bill Nos.
<br /> 19-23 and 19-27. We actually heard these two(2)weeks ago and they were approved unanimously
<br /> by this body. They have to,by State Law, come back before us for confirming on this.That is what
<br /> they are doing tonight. I want everybody to know that part because they might not have been
<br /> around last week.
<br /> Councilmember Jake Teshka made a motion to adopt Bill No. 19-23. Councilmember John Voorde
<br /> seconded this motion by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes.
<br /> 3
<br />
|