06-27-73 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JUNE 27 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED) revenue bond issue of the Water Works, and the installation of the mains would be based upon Publi Service Commission rules and regulations. Mr. Parker indicated that the following revenues would be derived from annexation of the proposed area: motor vehicle highway tax at $8.85 per capita, special motor vehicle highway 2 cents tax at $6.60 per capita, cigarette tax to the General Fund at $1.20 per capita, and cigarette tax to the Cumulative Capital Improvement Fund at $4.41 per capita; property tax revenue based upon the assessed valuation of $18,368.822 at the city tax rate of $5.04 or $925,789; and an estimated revenue sharing distribution of $164,318. Mr. Parker concluded his presentation by indicating that he wished to file with the City Clerk the cost analysis prepared by the Engineering Department to be made an exhibit and a part of the public hearing. Mr. Frank Mulligan, 17250 McErlain Street, President of the Clay Concerned Citizens, turned to the audience and thanked those in attendance for coming. Because of unfavorable comments made by the audience during Mr. Parker's presentation, Mr. Mulligan expressed the hope that the meeting would be an orderly meeting as Chairman Newburn had requested. He indicated that he hoped the citizens of Clay would express their feelings at comments made by either an applause or silence. He mentioned that the Council was holding and conducting the hearing and could terminate the hearing because of the outbursts of the people. He then expressed his appreciation to the Council for being given the opportunity of speaking at the hearing. As President of the Clay Concerned Citize: he indicated that the group contended that the consequences of the annexation would be detrimental to the city. He felt the analysis used was not sufficient, and he also felt his group had effec- tive alternatives. He indicated that the Clay residents opposed the annexation because the services to be provided by the city were not wanted or needed. He felt Clay's police and fire protection was equal to the city's and that Clay's water was superior to the city's and would continue to be superior. He also felt Clay's method of waste disposal was sufficient to meet the residents' needs. Because of those reasons, he indicated that the citizens of Clay Township could see no reason for the proposed annexation. He indicated that, at the same time, the people recognized the fact that South Bend was essential to Clay Township and that, as people move from the city to the suburbs, revenue is taken from the city. He expressed the feeling that annexation only encourages more people moving out to the suburbs. He also indicated that the people realized a city will decay without annexation. He concluded by indicating that he had expressed the feelings of the majority of the people in the auditorium, and that there were a number of people and groups who had opinions to express. He introduced Mr. Robert Edwards of the U.S. 31 Business and Professionalmen's Association. Mr. Edwards indicated that he represented 31 businesses and professional firms which consisted of 40 to 50 members doing business along U.S. 31 north from St. Mary's College to the Michigan state ling He pointed out that the proposed annexation would affect three - fourths of the members of the organ. zation. He indicated that he was appearing as president of the organization and wished to go on record as opposing the annexation for the following reasons: the cost for the city services which would be provided would be higher than the costs the businesses were now incurring; police and fire protection and sewer and water were available to the businesses at the present time under contract by request; and, a plan of this large an annexation should consist of more than just a few weeks of study and research. He requested that the Council withhold its authorization to annex until it is proved the annexation would be advantageous for all concerned. Mr. Mulligan then introduced Mr. Clarence Manion, a former Dean of the Notre Dame Law School. He indicated that two years ago, a similar annexation proceeding had taken place under the Republican administration. He mentioned that even now, his fellow Democrats still desired that the annexa- tion take place. He expressed hope that, by postponing the issue for more careful consideration, the results would be satisfactory for all concerned. He presented a sketch of the proposed area to be annexed. He indicated that many people are concerned because they do not know if they are or are not included in the annexation proposal. He indicated that one - eighth of the boundary of the proposed annexation was supposed to coincide with the boundary of the City of South Bend. He made further comments about where South Bend abuts Clay Township. He indicated that he worked in South Bend and paid taxes in South Bend; however, he lived in Clay Township. He indicated that he would yield to no one as to his admiration of South Bend; however, he could not see the reason for the annexation. He did not agree that misery loves company and that this was the reason for the annexation. He mentioned that no matter how attractive Clay Township might be to the City of Soutl Bend, the city could not annex the area by law unless one - eighth of the boundary bordered on South Bend. He indicated that he had walked the area that borders South Bend and, this time, there was more area to be annexed than the last time. He commented on the jagged lines of the area to be annexed. He felt the annexation was not a bona fide proposal. He indicated that it is the right of every American to move where they want to as long as a person takes care of himself. He men- tioned that there was no moral principle that justifies the ambition of a city to grow. He con- cluded by pointing out that, if the city does manage to annex Clay Township, 11,000 people would be brought into the city's jurisdiction and would remember it at the next election. Mr. Joseph Roper, the attorney representing Clay Township, 107 North Eddy Street, made his presen- tation against the proposed annexation. He commented on Mr. Manion's speech and indicated that it was a very difficult thing for an old lawyer to be moved by the speech as he had been. He addec that he felt sure that no member of the Council wanted to be a part of this power play. He indicated that, between 1956 and 1964, there had only been 1,925 acres annexed to South Bend. Out of the 1,925 acres annexed to South Bend, only 551 acres were taken in by city initiation and 1,374 acres were taken in by property -owner initiation. Previously, South Bend had been a more attractive place to live. Around 1964, taxes began to rise and became very high and people wanted to live in the country. The builder followed and went with the people in order to build his homes This was something that happened then and is still continuing. In this seven -year period, 940 of the annexations were initiated by the property owner and only 6% by the city. From 1964 to 1971, there were approximately 6,000 acres annexed through 50 ordinances. Of this 6,000 acres, 5,320 acres were initiated by the city and only 375 acres by the property owners. Of the total 6,000 acres annexed, 4,320 acres (more than 60 %) were brought in in 1969, 1970 and 1971. Less than 1% of the acreage was initiated by the property owners at that time. In 1964, there was a total of 14,000 acres in South Bend or 22 square miles. In October of 1971, 10 square miles were added for a total of 32 square miles. Mr. Roper indicated that, to his knowledge, there had never been an annexation ordinance that attempted to take in as much area as the present proposed annexation. He indicated that the terms of the present ordinance had never been discussed by the Council or the administration with the residents of the area. He felt some suggestions might have been made regarding the annexation ordinance and made it fair and just. He indicated that he had asked for a 48 -hour delay for the hearing on the ordinance which the Council had agreed upon; however, the resolutions passed by the Board of Works, Safety and Water Works Commissioners had just been