[MissoulaGov] committee update 12-17-08

[Bob Jaffe]

Greetings,

We opened this morning with a discussion of the budget and the Capital
Improvement Projects (CIP).  Mr. Hendrickson had raised concern over the
debt financing approach to our large capital items and the impending
reduction in City tax revenue.  As we continue to finance more stuff our
debt payments eat up more and more of our CIP budget. There is not
really any reason for concern at this point but it is becoming clear
that we will be deferring some purchases over the next few years.

 

In PAZ we continued our discussion of Clark Fork Terrace #1. We started
with the piece about impact fees versus SIDs. A question had been raised
as to why we were wanting SID protest waivers for work to be done on the
intersection of speedway and highway 200 if we are also collecting
impact fees. Isn't that asking them to pay for it twice?  

The answer we were given is that the impact fees are intended for major
roadway improvements and that intersection probably wouldn't even
qualify. In addition, it is likely that the impact fees collected will
be inadequate for reconstruction so we will need to have an SID anyway.
Mr. Wilkins said he doesn't like the SID protest waivers because he
thinks people have a constitutional right to protest.

It is important to understand the meaning of the protest waiver. If the
council proposes an SID and more than X% of the property owners protest
the SID, it then takes a 2/3 vote to pass the SID.  If a piece of
property is encumbered by an SID protest waiver it means that the owner
of that property cannot be counted towards the percent threshold that
triggers the 2/3 vote. It does not mean that the person cannot exercise
their constitutional right to free speech and protest the action of the
council.

 

Most of us on the council cut our SID teeth on the England Blvd. SID. In
that case many of the homeowners were very upset because they had only
recently purchased their homes for about all they could afford. So the
SID was adding a monthly payment to their homes they thought was too
much. Most or all of them had bought their homes in Pleasantview from
the developer and not through a realtor. They said that they were never
shown the plat with the SID waiver printed on it.  Jon's comments pretty
much echoed those concerns.

 

Another issue had to do with the request to dedicate park land along the
second choice route for the Milwaukee road trail. The developer is
asking us to make it a conditional easement instead in case he can
secure the first choice route. The only problem is that they asked us to
do that in Clark Fork Terrace #2 and then they sued us for it.  The park
dedication method of getting the trail is a little more solid and the
trust level is extremely low. It is a lot of work for me to not assume
when they open their mouths they are lying.

 

We also discussed the proposed development agreement that we are making
a condition of annexation.  Ryan Morton from MBIA made arguments
suggesting we were legally obligated to annex the property. This is
directly contradictory to everything we have learned up to this point so
I look forward to Mr. Nugent's response. 

 

We also addressed a plat amendment on a small subdivision in East
Missoula.  The discussion focused on how to best postpone tearing down a
small house behind the main house that was sitting right on the new
property line. Ron Ewert gave us the sob story of the old lady on the
fixed income living in the small house. In the end we approved language
that satisfied the property owner's wish to keep the little house until
the new home is built. Jason pointed out how nice it was that in this
case the whole council was able to recognize the value of an ADU
(accessory dwelling unit).

 

After lunch we resumed PAZ with the discussion of the sign ordinance.
Dave and I brought this forward to address the issue of electronic video
signs. There have been a ton of these signs popping up all over town
lately and we want to update our code so we can address them in some
way.  There was language proposed in the new zoning rewrite so it made
sense to use that as a base. The other concern is that the sign
ordinance would get lost inside the larger zoning rewrite project and
not really be noticed by the public or get adequate consideration by
council.

It turned out that our request for an interim urgency ordinance to
regulate electronic signs did set off some alarm bells for a number of
commercial interests. When I returned from lunch the chamber was full of
slightly panicked sign merchants and retailers. We also heard from folks
who said they were participating in the zoning rewrite and wanted us to
hold off from addressing this issue and allow them to address it in
their process.  Dave and I are in agreement that the testimony today
suggests that this issue will get adequate attention from the community
in the zoning rewrite so we can let it go for now. That process will
potentially bring us an ordinance as early as March. There's no point in
us taking on a bunch of work if others are already eager to do it. If
for some reason the process bogs down we can always bring the interim
ordinance back to committee.

 

After PAZ we had Public Works. I had to leave after the first few minute
but we were discussing a significant increase in our sidewalk program
for this next year. Concrete prices have dropped to 2000 levels and
there are indications they will drop a bunch more. The contractors are
pretty hungry for work right now so we are going to try to get a bunch
of jobs in while the prices are good.

 

When I got back from the fifth grade concert we were in A&F discussing
the contract to hire a lobbyist for the city to represent us during the
session. We discussed how we would be kept informed on what they were
doing and what the status was of the various bills that concerned the
city.  The session is a logistical nightmare. There are something like
2600 bills introduced and it all moves very fast. The Mayor's office has
a volunteer intern working with them this year to help organize the
information.

 

Thanks for your interest, 

 

Bob Jaffe

Missoula City Council, Ward 3

bjaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us <mailto:bjaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us> 

406-728-1052

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20081217/2f64e059/attachment.htm>