Vine St. Railroad Ave. Assessments - On or Off?

The city of Glenwood is moving forward with the much-debated $1.4 million Vine Street – Railroad Ave. reconstruction projects, but as of Monday, city administrator Brian Kissel and Glenwood’s five city council members had differing views as to whether the project should and would be funded in part by special assessments to property owners along the two roads.

The confusion stems from a pair of motions passed at the city council’s March 24 meeting which authorized the city to sign construction agreements for the projects and take on up to nearly $700,000 in general obligation bond debt to not only fund the roads projects, but also reimburse the city’s general fund for library roof replacement costs and purchase three vehicles (two for the public works department and one for the cemetery).

At a public hearing on March 10, several citizens voiced concerns about the plan that included the special assessments and a special debt service levy of 46 cents (per $1,000 taxable valuation) that would be included in the city’s 2015-2016 fiscal year budget. Despite the opposition, the council unanimously approved the plan with the understanding that the 2015-16 budget could be amended at a later date if the city council decided not to proceed with the roads project or other portions of the debt service levy, which could also be reduced at a later date.

When the controversial matter was discussed again on March 24, Susanne Gerlach, a consultant from  Des Moines-based Public Financial Management, Inc., presented an alternative plan for consideration that removes the vehicle purchases from the debt service levy and the special assessments on property owners, but would allow the roads projects and library roof reimbursement to take place. Her plan would reduce the 46-cent debt service levy to 34 cents, which is projected to cost the owner of a house assessed at $100,000 about $18.47 in the 2015-16 fiscal year.

Council member Craig Florian called the alternative plan a “no brainer” during a budget and finance subcommittee meeting and the plan appeared to have the support of the entire council, which voted 5-0 to authorize the construction contracts and the general obligation bond loan agreement. Before the vote, council members were informed the motions on the agenda couldn’t be amended to remove the assessments, but action could be taken at a later date. Council members Jessie Lundvall and Susan Hirschman, indicated they would support the motions under the alternative plan.

Statements made by council members during the discussion clearly led audience members to believe the council passed the motions with the intent of removing the special assessments.

On Friday, however, city administrator Brian Kissel said removal of the special assessments isn’t a done deal.

"There’s a few (council) members who feel like the assessments should not be on, but I’m not sure what the other members of the council are feeling,” Kissel said. “The scenario created by Susanne was just to lower the debt-service levy. In that scenario, she removed the special assessments from that calculation because the city council is not 100 percent sure about the assessments, yet.

“They did approve the assessments about a month ago and those were sent on to the recorder. The council still has to make a final decision on those in the next few months.”

In subsequent interviews over the weekend, Lundvall and Hirschman both said their “yes” vote came with the intent to remove the assessments.

“Absolutely, my sole intent was for those assessments to be removed,” Lundvall said. “If that special assessment would have still been included in Susanne’s figures, I would not have voted for it.”

Hirschman gave a similar statement.

“I would not have voted for it had they (fellow council members)  had not agreed to have the assessment come off,” Hirschman said.

Florian said he has not been opposed to the assessments, but sensed the roads project probably wasn’t going to move forward unless a compromise was reached.

Based on discussion at the council meeting, council member Joe Edwards said he fully understands why audience members went home from City Hall with the understanding that the assessments would be removed.  However, Edwards said he’s still undecided how he’ll vote when the assessment matter is brought to a vote. He hopes to get more feedback from constituents before that vote takes place.

Kay LeFever is the lone council member who appears to be firmly opposed to removing the assessments.

“I represent the greater population of Glenwood and not just a few people,” LeFever said. “You become a property owner, you have certain responsibilities.

“From a taxpayer point of view, am I willing to pay for improvements on other peoples property?”

Vine Street property owner Ryan Sell said the city turned to the assessments because it had not properly set aside money for the project. The assessments proposed for Vine Street property owners range from $1,785 to $16,000, according to the city’s engineering consultant Steve Perry.

Sell called the assessments “ridiculous” at the March 24 meeting.

“An 80-year-old man is getting a $13,000 bill because the city spent all of its money,” Sell said.

Lundvall and Hirschman both said not taking the assessments off now would severely damage the city council’s credibility.

“My next plan is to get that (removal of assessments) on the agenda so that we can get that taken care of,” Lundvall said. “You know, we have zero credibility with our citizens right now, due to the financial issues and some issues within the city.

“We’ve been saying for a couple meetings now that we’re going to fix this. The way to fix this is not to hit the citizens again with a special assessment after we sat in front of them and said, ‘No, we don’t want the assessment’, vote for it, then turn around and do it (assessment). That’s slimy and it’s not the way we should operate.”

Over $970,000 in federal funds (80 percent of project costs) has been awarded to the project through Iowa Department of Transportation money distributed through the Metropolitan Area Planning Agency and council members are in agreement that they’d be remiss in letting those dollars get away.

Gerlach said the assessments can be removed anytime prior to construction work being completed on the road projects, but it would take a formal vote of the city council.

Kissel said the city’s plan is to have the projects completed over the summer prior to the start of the 2015-16 school year.