Minutes - Council Work Session - 10/26/2021

Home

changing to an hourly rate for room rentals at City Hall and would want to speak with Staff to determine what is reasonable. Councilmember Specht answered that it would be worth a discussion, especially if reservations could be made online. Finance Director Lund stated it is recommended to introduce the changes to the rates and charges on November 9, 2021 for adoption on November 23, 2021 to allow 30 days’ notice to go into effect by January 1, 2022. The consensus of the Council was to follow staff recommendation, with the addition of the mobile home tie down fees being set at $75. Councilmember Musgrove asked for clarification that in 2022, it is proposed to change rental fees from the $10 flat rate to $5 per hour and the $25 rate would be resident hourly. Building Official Szykulski confirmed this. Councilmember Howell asked about lowering the rate for residents, noting it is a big jump to go from $24 for the day, to $25 hourly, to have a bigger disparity between resident and nonresidents. Parks and Assistant Public Works Superintendent Riverblood answered that this is a proposed dollar increase, noting it was the nonprofits that were at the flat rate, everyone else was hourly. 2.02: Review 2022-2031 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Finance Director Lund stated the Council is reviewing the first draft. She explained the priority levels, noting a priority 1 is something that is within the next couple of years, Priority 2 is something that is new, that has never been done before and isn’t a replacement such as the Police vehicle in 2022, Priority 3 and 4 are for the remaining 8 years of the CIP, and Priority 5 is a placeholder within the document. For example, the community center which is unfunded. Finance Director Lund reviewed the staff report, noting this document is subject to change. She highlighted the main cash flows pages and explained the CIP is a planning tool so everything that is included is not adopted until it comes to the Council as individual projects. Councilmember Musgrove commented that there weren’t TIF districts listed under the “sources of funding.” She asked if there were any funds that qualify for any TIF district dollars, noting she wanted to make sure the City was using those dollars in areas they can be used. Finance Director Lund answered, the TIF cash flows are included. In regard to TIF 1 and TIF 2, those were the older districts that were allowed for pooling. She explained the project for 116 was allowed for funding but the County pushed that project out so it’s no longer reflected in the CIP. Because of that, TIF 1 and TIF 2 do not reflect the 116 project anymore. She noted the fund balances are listed and the respective cash flows. She gave the example of TIF 2 having a projected balance of $1.7 million after 2021, which is because $1.5 million was added back when the 116 project was put on hold. City Council Work Session / October 26, 2021 Page 5 of 15