Loading...
12-13-2010 December 13, 2010 Special Called MeetingSpecial Called Meeting December 13, 2010 All council members were present. Also present were City Administrator Eric Taylor, City Attorney Scott Cochran, Community Development Director Ken Suddreth, Community Relations Director Jennifer Bennett, City Engineer Keith Williams, Assistant City Administrator Tammi Saddler, Jim Croy, City Clerk Susan Hiott, Executive Assistant to Mayor and Council Lizette Bryan, Executive Assistant to City Administrator Rosemary Rivera, and representatives of the press and several citizens. A Special Called Meeting of Mayor and Council was held at Smyrna City Hall. Presiding officer Mayor Max Bacon called the meeting to order at 6:40 o'clock p.m. FORMAL BUSINESS: 1. Authorization for Mayor to approve and sign the Special Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) Intergovernmental Agreement Mayor Bacon explained that this agenda item was similar to the authorization addressing a five to six year SPLOST voted on and approved by the Council tivithin the last month. He stated that the item currently under review addressed a four year agreement. Mr. Taylor provided the background, stating that the City had recently adopted asix-year SPLOST and approved a project list in accordance with the County's plans as part of the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). He announced that the following morning, the Board of Commissioners would be voting on a four-year SPLOST, requiring that the City adopt afour-year Intergovernmental Agreement and approved project list. Mr. Taylor made known that the agreement had been reviewed by staff, along with the project management team at Croy Engineering, and approval was recommended. Mayor Bacon requested input on comparisons between the previously adopted SPLOST and that being proposed, in particular as it affected the budget. Mr. Williams responded that the original SPLOST was in the neighborhood of 53 million dollars. It was calculated that the four-rear SPLOST would decrease the anticipated budget by approximately 20 million dollars. Mayor Bacon recognized Council Member McNabb, who inquired of the City Attorney if Council voted to not participate, would that mean the businesses of Smyrna would not be obligated to collect the 1 % sales tax? Mr. Cochran explained that if the referendum was passed the 1 % sales tax would be in effect county-wide regardless of the Council's vote. It was further clarified that if the Council did not approve this item and the SPLOST passed the County referendum, the citizens of Smyrna would still be subject to the increased tax but riot guaranteed revenue towards SPLOST projects. December 13, 2010 Mayor Bacon expressed his displeasure with the uncertainty of the process at the County level and the amount of time consumed with reviewing modifications to the agreement. He re-stated that the taxpayers could be charged the tax even if the Council voted against the SPLOST but would then receive nothing in return and requested input. Council Member Lnenicka requested that Mr. Taylor and Mr. Cochran explain how, if the City were to disapprove this agreement, the County and the State would determine the allocation of the revenue received from the City. Mr. Cochran responded that the funds would be allocated from the County to the other governments that had passed the agreement. He explained that in order for cities to be included in the allocation of funds at least 50% of the population ira the cities would have to be represented through IGA. If a city was not part of the IGA, the redistributed funds could be used for County projects within a City but would not be designated for City projects. He explained that, under the law, excess revenue could be used for lower tiered projects in cities that had approved the IGA. Council Member Lnenicka inquired if it was possible to become part of the agreement at a later date and Mr. Cochran responded that the IGA had to be voted on by Council prior to the time that the County called for a referendum. He stated that the County had not provided notification to the City, until a few days prior, of their intention to call the referendum that Tuesday morning at 10:00 o'clock a.m. Accordingly, any IGA would have to be passed prior to the County referendum and it was his understanding that the cities had either held or scheduled special called meetings to address this agreement. Council Member Lnenicka asked if there was a legal requirement to provide a detailed project list to the County at this time or if a lump-sum total of estimated costs would suffice until such time that an itemized accounting could be provided. Mr. Cochran clarified that the approved agreement must contain a certain level of specificity of projects in order to have accountability for voter approval. M~'~or Bacon clarified that completion of the items on the project list was contingent upon revenue collection and that the City was not otherwise obligated to fund the proposed projects. Council Member Lnenicka expressed concern that the Council had not been afforded the opportunity to discuss a revised project list for the City and highlig~ited the fact that the County had not made its project list available for the Council to deliberate prior to this call for approval. He emphasized his discomfort on voting to approve expenditures without adequate time and information to consider. Mr. Cochran deferred to Mr. Croy for further explanation but summarized that the city projects contained in the revised IGA represented a pared down list of items already known to and discussed by Council. Mayor Bacon clarified that the list did not contain any new projects but rather included a reduction based on the projected loss of revenue. He cited the absence of the Windy Hill December 13. 2010 3 corridor project as one example no longer contained on either the City or County project list and Mr. Croy confirmed his statement. Mayor Bacon discussed how projects would be completed based on their assigned tier level. Council Member McNabb asked if there was anything currently in .writing from the County regarding their intention to acquire funding for the Windy Hill project through pursuit of a Federal grant. He outlined the history of the County's decreasing support for the project, which addressed a problem created by the County, and emphasized that now the County had eliminated that project all together. Council Member McNabb asked what reassurance, other than talk, had been provided to the Council to demonstrate the County's serious commitment to solving a problem it created for the Smyrna community. Mr. Croy responded that the Windy Hill project was included on the list found on the County website as well as on the list for Federal aid projects to be pursued as part of the SPLOST package. Mayor Bacon concurred with Council Member McNabb's comments regarding the County's diminishing support, adding that there had been a change in leadership at the County level since the commitment to the Windy Hill project was first made. Council Member Lnenicka acknowledged the heightened support at the origin of the project and stated that the Council had addressed the importance of this issue with the current leadership as well. He emphasized that the critical transportation projects for Smyrna included the completion of the Concord Rd. and Windy Hill projects and that the specific purpose of the SPLOST is to fund critical projects. He reinforced that the Windy Hill corridor problem exists as a direct result of the County's development of the Macland Road Connector and that a joint effort with the County would be necessary to resolve traffic-flow issues. Council Member Lnenicka summarized the partnership history of the project, stating his disapproval of the County's decision to walk away from its initial commitment to this priority project and voicing his opposition to a SPLOST not containing the Windy Hill development. Mayor Bacon stated that not all of the Commission had a vested interest in realizing the Windy Hill project regardless of prior agreements. He noted that the impact of the Macland Rd. Connector was not yet realized but that in order to be effective, improvements to Windy Hill would have to be made all the way to the I-75 exchange. Mayor Bacon acknowledged Council Member Newcomb, who discussed the scope of the project and inquired, hypothetically, which other project(s) currently listed could be replaced in favor of the Windy Hill initiative. He emphasized the importance of maintaining current infrastructure. Council Member Lnenicka stated that the Windy Hill corridor project would play a vital role in the transformation and redevelopment of northern Smyrna, aligning with the Council's goal of establishing a more unified City and its overall vision for Smyrna. Council Member Newcomb acknowledged that project's strategic focus and pointed out that allocating money to it out of the reduced budget would jeopardize other necessary programs. Council Member Lnenicka submitted the suggestion that the Concord Rd. and Windy Hill initiatives be given priority above all others. December 13. 2010 4 Council Member McNabb expressed the importance of remembering that SPLOST is to be used for "special" projects and not initiatives that should be accomplished using general funds. He advocated for removing all items from consideration with the exception of the Windy Hill corridor and urged Council not to fall into the trap of allocating SPLOST funds for regular projects. He suggested that a review of the priority level of the other projects listed might be in order. Council Member Newcomb read through the list of projects citing the "special" nature of each one and restated that, without a comprehensive development of the Windy Hill corridor, the issue of congestion would merely be deferred to another location in the City. He expressed that a millage increase would be required to pay for any items removed from the SPLOST in favor of moving forward with the Windy Hill .corridor. Mayor Bacon stated that all of the items on the list had already been recently approved by Council and expressed his concern about approving the Windy Hill.. project if the County was not committed to funding their share out of the four-year SPLOST. Mayor Bacon discussed that the need for the Windy Hill Rd. project was born out. of Cobb County's expansion to the West and the increased traffic travelling through Smyrna. He expressed his frustration at the short notice given by the County to the Council to discuss these matters prior to the referendum. Council Member Newcomb iterated that the SPLOST had been reduced from six to four years as a result of constituent input and urged Council to approve even without the inclusion of the Windy Hill project. Mayor Bacon reminded all present that they could either vote to approve the IGA and be part of the program or disapprove it and be denied access to SPLOST revenue. MOTION: Council Member Pritchett moved to approve the consent agenda. Motion was seconded by Council Member Wood. MOTION: Council Member Lnenicka moved to amend the motion to delete, under transportation projects, all items but Concord Rd. improvements and replace them with the Windy Hill Rd. initiative and the Motion was seconded by Council Member McNabb Mayor Bacon clarified the details of Council Member Lnenicka's motion and emphasized that the County had not allotted matching funds for the Windy Hill project out of the SPLOST bring proposed. There was discussion as to whether or not changes to the City's project list would have to be approved by the County as part of the IGA and that the County-had, at its discretion, the ability to modify their list of funded projects prior to the referendum. Council Member Lnenicka expounded on the importance of the Windy Hill project to the overall health and growth of the City and expressed his desire to see the County view this development in a similar fashion. This was followed by discussion about which line items December 13, 2010 5 would be removed to accommodate Windy Hill with Council Member Lnenicka explaining that all transportation projects, except Concord Rd., should be replaced with the Windy Hill initiative. Mayor Bacon pointed out that reassigning funds designated for other transportation projects would not provide an amount sufficient to meet the estimated budgetary requirements of the Windy Hill project. Council Member Lnenicka voiced his opinion that it was important to focus on long-term goals. Mr. Cochran inquired if, with the substitutions, there would be enough money to complete the two primary projects. Mr. Croy explained that after the funds for Concord Rd. improvements had been spent it would leave slightly less than half of the money necessary to complete Windy Hill as originally proposed and that fact would have to be appropriately explained to voters. Council Member Smith inquired if the intention was to "bank" themoney until the full amount needed to proceed with the project could be acquired or if the process would advance piece-meal, with a potential for stagnation if future funds were not approved. Council Member Lnenicka responded that he anticipated it would run a course similar to the Concord Rd. project with the initial focus being on engineering and right-of--way and additional funds being allocated later to the construction efforts. He stated that he hoped the County would honor their original agreement but, withstanding that, he urged Council to think long-term and pursue this visionary project. Mayor Bacon expressed his concern that public support for along-term project might not exist. Council Member McNabb explained that it might be advantageous to start now as right- of-way costs would only increase and the amount needed later would be greater than that currently estimated. He advocated starting the project now even if it could not be completed without future SPLOST dollars. Mayor Bacon concurred with the statement regarding right-of--way costs and there was discussion about the County abandoning its commitment to assist in the funding of the development. Mr. Cochran addressed potential legal issues of forcing the purchase ofright-of--way without a public purpose project that could be funded by current initiatives. He also informed all present that a property could not be condemned for public purpose unless it was redeveloped within a certain amount of time. Accordingly, unless Council was willing to fund this project out of alternate revenue if the SPLOST' was not approved, they could only engage in voluntary right of way acquisitions. Without a funded project, eminent domain could not be enforced and the success of the entire project might be in jeopardy. Mayor Bacon again expressed his concern that the citizens would not vote for engineering and acquisition without tangible improvements and the stipulation that future SPLOSTs would be required. He also called for a re-evaluation of the list if the Council felt the primary focus needed to be just Concord Rd. and Windy Hill. December 13, 2010 6 Council Member Anulewicz cited that the County's recent decisions appear to have been reactionary and that she would not be in favor of going back on her previous vote of approving the City's project list in order to send the County a message. Council Member Pritchett stated that the Council had adequate time to review and discuss the items listed and that she was not in favor of the amendment. MOTION: A vote was taken on Council Member Lnenicka's motion to amend the motion to delete, under transportation projects, all items but Concord Rd. improvements and replace them with the Windy Hill Rd. initiative. Motion to amend failed 2-5 with Councilman Lnenicka and Councilman McNabb in support. MOTION: A vote was taken on Council Member Pritchett's motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion was approved 6-1 with Councilman Lnenicka opposed. 9 ~-9 A With no further business; themeeting was ad'o~ urned_at 7:40 o'clock p.m. --A ..._ - "~C~ ~. ~ e ~ ~:,.~ A. MAX BACON, MAYOR SUSAN D. HIOTT, CITY CLERK EN P TCHETT, WARD 1 ~ ~ RI ANULEWICZ, ~RD 3 -~.. JAL RON NEWCOMB, WARD 2 ICHAEL MCN BB, ARD 4 ~~~~~~ ~~ CHARLES PETE WOOD, WARD 7 COBB COUNTY SPLOS`f 2011 - CITY OF SMYRNA PROJECTS LIST ,~`~' 3-a~* 4 YEAR Transportation Projects Descri lion Total Road Projects Concord Road Improvements $ 11,755,000, Windy Hill Rd R/W, Intersection Improvement 8 PE --- $ 2,000,000 Belmont Hills Connector Road $ 2,137,000' Ward Street Improvements __ $ 1,500,000' _ _ Villa a Parkwa _ I_m rovements_ ~ ___.. Y... P__ $ 1,500,000', Reed_Road Improvements __ -- - $ 321,000' Intersection Improvements _ _ _ _ __ _ $ _ 1,275,407' Congestion Relief Improvements $ 1,275,407' -- - -- - _ _ PathslSidewalks $ 1,069,000 --- Resurfacing_ -- _ _ $ 4,366,000' Pavement Markings $ 214,0001 -- _ - _ Curb & Gutter $ 1,069,000 Bridge Rehabihtation__ ___ $ 534,000 Studies - -- -- $ 214,000' ---- 1 Tran rtatlon Subtotal S 229 14 . Parks and Recreation Projects Descri lion Total Park Improvements $ 2,137,000 Parks & Racreatlon Subtotal ; 2,137 000 Public Safety Projects Descri lion Total - Public Safety Facilitylmprovements $ _--- 427 000 Public Safety Equipment $ 1,100,000 Public Sa Subtotal t 1,527,000.. Keep Smyrna Beautiful Descri lion Total _. - _ --- - _ _ __- Rec clm Faalit Im rovements ---- Y 9 Y P - _ $ 1,040,504 Sm BeautNui Subtotal j 1040,504 BUDGET GRAND TOTAL $ 33,934,318 Tier 2 Projects To Be Implemented If Additional Funding Becomes Available Descri lion Total -- - Intersection improvements _-----_ _ $ 500,000 Windy Hill Road -- -- $ 18,000,000 Cobb Parkway Queue Jump Lanes - - -- _ - - $ 1,100,000 Paths /Sidewalks ----- - - -- -- $ 500,000 Resurfaci~ ___ - _ _ $ 2,500,000 Curb & Gutter $ 500,000 Parklmprovements $ 1,000,000 Tier 2 Pro acts Subtotal $ 24,100,000 12/13/2010