06-22-15 Common Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JUNE 22, 2015 a comment this will be a way to create some tax revenue. You can't find ways to create new tax revenue, that is illegal and against the federal law. This looks like you want to jack fines up for these departments to create revenue to run the departments. That's what we pay taxes for. Councilmember Henry Davis made a great point $12.1 million to the Parks Department, some of that money has to be for mowing. The City Code enforcement department writes another check for $190,000, or closer to $170,000, then the redevelopment writes another check for $34,000 that is almost a quarter million dollars above their $12.1 million budget just for mowing; when everyone is telling me that the lawns aren't getting mowed. Bottom line here, it is not a matter of fining the public, and you don't want to increase fines, then you don't want to have Council people come up here and say that is a great way to generate some tax dollars. That's basically what he is saying, if you don't believe me I'm recording it. You can't raise tax dollars for any department by fining us. So I think you better put this on the back burner again, as the ownership issue is a big one. I was nice enough to mow the lawn for properties that I don't own but I'm not going to do it again. The bank needs to step up and take ownership, you have foreclosures where people should not be liable for those issues. Rebuttal: Council President Tim Scott, stated that what we are looking at here is the letter of the law what is current and what is proposed. There is a lot of conversation about capacity and the City Code, and what the Parks Department can or cannot do. This is two - prong, what needs to be addressed since 1962 and what's in front of you is directed at the property owner to take care of their business. Right now what we have done so far has not worked, we want to direct the changes to the owner make them responsible to cut it. There has been a lot murmurs about vacant lots that the city tore down and now it is the cities property and the city needs to cut this property, and why hasn't the city mowed it because we know Parks has a capacity issue. Whether there is a house there or not that property has an owner. The city is doing all of us a favor by mowing that yard, doing it under the continuous enforcement. How do we get this to stop? When what we are proposing here is trying to break and end that cycle. Last thing, the Park's Department is basically a contracted agent for the Code Enforcement. Code has their own budget alone and add more capacity to the Park's Department by the Park cutting properties they do redevelopment. The budget for Code Enforcement is $175,000 based on violations. Out of $175,000, roughly $40 each for about 3,500 cuts, we know the Parks Department can't cut that. But let's not confuse issues with issues that is for the Resolution that we will come up with in July. What we want to do is ask for a vote on the letter of the law with the changes that we are proposing here. Councilmember Dr. Ferlic interjected we need to answer the question about the leaves, how is this effected? Council President Scott stated it will be a code violation, if it is over nine (9) inches it will be in violation, but I suggest you get with Randy after this. Councilmember Dr. Ferlic addressed Jesse, I never meant to imply that this is a tax revenue. Councilmember Derek Dieter interjected we have to answer everyone's questions. The other question had to do with city lots. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated he did make a statement towards it whether he answered it or not is another thing. Council President Scott replied people think that vacant and abandoned properties are city lots which they are not city lots. Of the city lots, parks, and all public land there are 395 parcels that the city owns and 300 of those are in Ignition Park alone. (Roy Signs from the Council audience reiterated my question regarding the city lots, is about the lots deeded to the city and who is going to hold them accountable for that property ?) Councilmember Dr. Ferlic responded you would call Randy about that as I have several lots that are not up to code. You would call the code department to make something to happen, as this is not justified. I want to clarify with Jesse that I never meant to imply that you raise taxes by fines, they are not deductible by the IRS. You can't deduct your fines from the IRS. I'm saying quality of life issues are the reason why people move into a city, by getting more people from the outside to move in to South Bend because we keep our lawns correct and our house correct, then we will create more tax dollars. Council Attorney Kathy Cekanski- Farrand in response to Oliver Davis in two sections of the proposed bill noted, it specifically states that the fines that are proposed; and that all the other items that are in the city code currently are supplemental in any other revenue or action that the department of law can take. If it is an emergency or a public health issue that is over and above does not limit and states that specifically. In response to Councilmember Henry Davis' questions the State specifically states that it is up to the Common Council to set the ordinance. 13