06-27-73 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED) transportation of children to school would be the responsibility of the Transportation Corporation He mentioned that previously an effort had been made to provide bus service on U.S. 31 North, and it had been a disaster. He stated that the cost of putting bus service into the annexed area would be more like five or six times the figure used of $40,411. He felt the Council members deserved more professional research than was given them. He indicated that the letter dated June 22, 1973, from the Bureau of Design, and Administration had just been received by him late in the evening of the 25th. He suggested that the Council recognize that certain items had not been fully researched. He mentioned that he was not trying to make fun of anyone, but merely pointing out that it appeared the work was done hurridly after the Council had accepted the ordinance. He again repeated that he felt the Council should have received better information. Regarding the anticipated revenue of $1,318,186, Mr. Romine indicated that Council President Nemeth had stated, on T.V. Chronicle, that expanding the city's tax base was a reason for the annexation. He stated that the Federal Fiscal Assistance Act requires that these funds be used for the benefit of all those concerned. He briefly talked about the revenue sharing funds and indicated that it would only last through 1976. He wondered what would happen if the proposed $35,816 excess revenue did not materialize. He asked who would pay for the services that had been proposed to be installed. He quoted a section from the Tax Control Board regarding permission to increase tax levies if the increases are necessary and result from annexation. He felt that, in view of the feelings in the matter and the uncertainties, annexation would not solve the urban problems. He felt there should be better management of the urban problem, and he talked briefly about assessed valuation and its increases. He stated that Representative Doyle has said that his position has not changed. He also stated that Representative Doyle wants legislative relief. Mr. Romine indicated that he had sought the opinions of the representatives and had contacted nine, and eight were in agreement that annexation was not the way to solve urban problems. It was his consensus that the Council recog- nize the financial problems annexation might hold for the city. He asked that the annexation ordinance be postponed for not less than 60 days. Mr. William Briggs stated that the meeting was a business hearing and that there were people pre- sent at the meeting that also wanted to speak. He asked for the opportunity to speak. Mr. Mullig< indicated that he respected the right of any citizen to be heard. He expressed hope that the research presented covered the majority of the remarks to be made. Mr. Robert DuComb, State Representative, indicated that this type of annexation would contribute t the growing conflict of the interests of the city and the outside area. He felt the annexation would not solve the problems of the urban area. He quoted from a letter written to the Common Council members by Representative Richard Doyle, wherein Representative Doyle requested that the Council delay the annexation for 60 days in order to formulate a program with the hope of trying to propose legislation to improve the relationship between cities and outside areas. Mr'. DuComb stated that this particular problem was not unique to St. Joseph County; and he expressed hope tha a compromise could be worked out. Mr. Richard Lindsey, State Representative, indicated that he realized the Council was trying to take a responsible means of solving South Bend's problems. He felt the problems would only be increased and spread out by the annexation and that the best way to arrive at a solution was to ge- together and come up with a package of bills to take to the next session of the legislature. Mr. Phillip Barkley, a St. Joseph County Councilman, indicated that he wished to speak; however, he would yield to Mr. William Briggs who had previously stated that he wanted to speak to the Council regarding the proposed annexation. Mr. William Briggs stated that he lived in South Bend and that he had always admired the residents of Clay Township for the courage, pride and ambition they had shown in handling their community affairs; their fire and police protection; parks, etc. at a lesser tax rate than South Bend. He stated that South Bend had, at one time, been peaceful, and he proceeded to talk briefly on crime and its increase within the city. He wondered how the city could expect to protect an even larger area. He indicated that the people of Clay Township lived in freedom of choice and did not wish to pay for the City of South Bend's mistakes. He felt a larger tax base was not the answer. He asked about the possibility of cutting costs in the city's payroll and taking care of the people who utilize the tax loopholes. He concluded by indicating that he loved the City of South Bend; however, he did not feel that South Bend could offer Clay Township anything, and he questioned whether or not this annexation would be forced upon the Clay residents. Mr. Phillip Barkley, 50690 Portage Highway, South Bend, a St. Joseph County Councilman, indicated that many people share South Bends concern for continued growth; however, he felt if the present situation was analyzed, the ordinance would not fulfill the requirement of being in the best interests of the general good. He stated that the general welfare would not be promoted and that the Clay residents and South Bend residents would not benefit. He talked about German Township being the border that gives South Bend its one - eighth contiguous area and no mention being given to that area. He stated that part of that area was still without fire protection. He talked about the annexations in 1969 and the problems the city encountered and felt that the whole pro- gram was based on a false premise. He felt the residents in the area of German Township were beinc neglected and there was no provision being made to solve the existing problems in that area, such as the problem with the wells drying up. He stated that those claims must be satisfied. Accordinc to a statement made by Mr. David Wells of the Engineering Department, he had indicated that the new addition to the sewage plant would be inadequate as soon as it was completed. Mr. Barkley indicated that, with an expanded tax base, services should be provided and improved. He talked briefly on the school re- organization problem encountered a few years ago. He stated that, when the city expands, no one thinks about reducing the county rates that the city also pays. He also stated that the County Park Department planned to increase its budget and South Bend residents wil_ pay their share, just as in other increases. He concluded by requesting that the Council delay passage of the ordinance at the present time. Mr. Mulligan thanked the Council for the opportunity to appear before it and also for the Council' patience in the matter. He felt the objectives of the city are attainable. He stressed that Clay Township would like to work together with South Bend,-and he asked that the Council digest the information presented and delay the matter so that a plan could be worked out. Mrs. Frederick Mutzl, President of the St. Joseph County Fair Tax Association, referred to the Pledge to the Flag given at the meeting and the reference to "liberty and justice for all ". She quoted a statement made by the Fair Tax Association favoring a referendum on the proposed annexa- tion. She then stated that, as a resident of South Bend, she had been trying to estimate the