Caleb Warnock - DAILY HERALD
Highland City Council members got an earful on Tuesday night from residents unhappy about a proposed road bond. Confusing, conflicting and clear as mud is what residents called the city's plans. City staffers said the council should borrow money because construction costs are falling.
About 100 people gathered for a public hearing, with 13 speaking against the proposed bond, and some of them speaking twice. No one spoke in favor. Protesters outside the meeting held banners reading, "No bond equals no debt."
No vote was taken on Tuesday. Mayor Jay Franson said it could be a month or more before the council votes on the issue.
The council was taken to task by residents for clear-as-mud double-speak about even the simplest information -- how much the council would like to borrow, and exactly what it would be used for.
"It makes us feel like you are not being honest or open," said one resident. Another said the city had hoodwinked residents.
"I could get into a long dialogue there but I am not going to tonight," responded Mayor Franson.
Franson parlayed with residents one by one and took the brunt of residents' displeasure. At one point Franson gestured to the council, protesting that he as mayor will not even get to vote on the proposal and that council members are the ones who need to hear residents' opinions.
Residents said the city's logic for going into debt during an economic crisis did not hold up, and that the country was in the financial mess it's in because "people have been living on credit. We have forgotten how to save."
Not only should the city wait, and avoid going into debt now, but any large debt for roads should be put to a public vote, residents said repeatedly. In addition, the roads the city proposes to spend money on would actually lead to Wal-Mart in Cedar Hills and Smith's in Lehi, further draining sales tax from Highland.
When pressed by residents about why the city doesn't simply put the matter to a vote of residents, the mayor said a vote would cost money. That response brought audible laughter from the audience. Someone asked if it would cost $1 million, a reference to city staff saying that borrowing $3.3 million for roads would cost Highland almost $900,000 in interest alone over a decade.
During the course of Tuesday's meeting, Mayor Franson added confusion to the issue by using a variety of sums. The council has already voted to begin the process of borrowing up to $5 million. If the city were to make those debt payments using just state road funds, the city would only be able to borrow $3.3 million. Franson then told residents that council members could opt to borrow $1.2 million to pay for maintenance only, and then later he said if residents forced a vote, the city could put $16 million on the ballot because that is the total amount of work currently needed in the city on roads.
Residents also said Tuesday's explanation of where the money would be spent was different from an explanation written by the mayor in a recent city newsletter. Franson responded by saying that what he wrote in the newsletter was simply "options."
Franson later apologized for the confusion, though he was pointed in saying he did not know if the confusion was the city's fault.
"We did not purposefully try to create the misconfusion, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen," he said.
After more than an hour of public comment, Councilman Brian Braithwaite said it had become clear to him that residents were not happy because the city was not being clear about how much the city wants to borrow or what it would be used on.
The city should release a list of road priorities, he said. Councilwoman Kathryn Schramm agreed.
Franson said the city would communicate road priorities and costs to residents in upcoming weeks, possibly in the city newsletter.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
Mayor Hopes for Enough $ to Finish Road
At the "illegal public hearing" held on Tuesday, February 17, 2009, Janet Wadsworth asked and received answers to two questions.
1. In his February 2009 "Highland Insider" message, Mayor Franson explained that "the revenue source that will be used to pay for this borrowed money (road bonds)" will be money the "city receives from the State of Utah known as B&C Road funds." Included in his explanation was this statement: "This is a stable revenue source that sees very little annual fluctuation."
Janet Wadsworth asked how stable the amount of this revenue source really is and whether the amount could actually go down due to economic slumps.
In response, Barry Edwards explained the formula the State uses to allocate the funds to cities. He acknowledged that the allocation was in fact down from the previous one, which means Highland will receive less money this year. He also acknowledged that it is possible that these B&C Road funds could shrink further.
2. Janet said that it is her understanding that the $4 million that Utah County has committed to Highland is specifically for building the "Murdock Connector" as a part of the widening of 4800 West, a corridor of regional significance.
She asked whether that $4 million would still be given to Highland if Highland fails to come up with the remaining dollars needed to build this connector between the Alpine Highway and 4800 West.
Mayor Franson acknowledged that the $4 million was offered only for the Murdock Connector road and could not be used for other Highland City road improvements. He also acknowledged that, if Highland City does not have enough money (when combined with the money from Utah County) to construct this road, the County's $4 million would not necessarily still be available to Highland.
1. In his February 2009 "Highland Insider" message, Mayor Franson explained that "the revenue source that will be used to pay for this borrowed money (road bonds)" will be money the "city receives from the State of Utah known as B&C Road funds." Included in his explanation was this statement: "This is a stable revenue source that sees very little annual fluctuation."
Janet Wadsworth asked how stable the amount of this revenue source really is and whether the amount could actually go down due to economic slumps.
In response, Barry Edwards explained the formula the State uses to allocate the funds to cities. He acknowledged that the allocation was in fact down from the previous one, which means Highland will receive less money this year. He also acknowledged that it is possible that these B&C Road funds could shrink further.
2. Janet said that it is her understanding that the $4 million that Utah County has committed to Highland is specifically for building the "Murdock Connector" as a part of the widening of 4800 West, a corridor of regional significance.
She asked whether that $4 million would still be given to Highland if Highland fails to come up with the remaining dollars needed to build this connector between the Alpine Highway and 4800 West.
Mayor Franson acknowledged that the $4 million was offered only for the Murdock Connector road and could not be used for other Highland City road improvements. He also acknowledged that, if Highland City does not have enough money (when combined with the money from Utah County) to construct this road, the County's $4 million would not necessarily still be available to Highland.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Franson: "No Decision Yet" But Actions Contradict
At the Highland City Council meeting held on February 17, 2009, Mayor Jay Franson was very careful to inform the attendees that a decision regarding the creation of a proposed bond of $5 million to fund repair of existing roads and the potential construction of new roads had not yet been made by our elected officials. During the comments that were made during the public appearances, there was a lot of comment regarding the inadvisability of entering into further debt at this time.
I heard no favorable comments regarding further indebtedness. Toward the end of the public appearances I made the following comments amplified somewhat by the reasoning behind them:
1) In spite of the assurances that no formal decisions on the bond had been made, we were aware of public statements regarding the creation of an east-west connector road to be referred to as the Murdock Connector which would be funded by the proposed fund.
2)That my particular neighborhood had felt "hoodwinked" as two homeowners in our subdivision had been approached by the mayor and informed that their homes and properties were to be acquired by the city in an eminent domain action to make way for this connection through the southern portion of our subdivision and that acquisition would also entail encroachment on a park owned by our homeowners association.
3) That an east-west connector road had previously been proposed approximately five years ago and had then been dismissed as unnecessary secondary to the poor development of 4800 West as a collector route. Additionally, the residents of the western portions of Highland no longer needed access to Lone Peak High School on the east, they having been diverted to American Fork High School on the south.
4) Referring to an earlier comment that sales tax revenues had suffered with the building of the Smith's Marketplace to our west, creating a direct access to the new Walmart currently being constructed in Cedar Hills might add the final nail in the coffin to Kohler's potential future non-viability and lead to further loss of city revenues.
5) That Central Park in the middle of Manhattan represented one example of a decision to allow an "inconvenience" in traffic access to trump the needs of a quick commute in favor of attractive green space.
6) That prior to inviting further debt for new road construction, the citizens of Highland and its elected officials should once again revisit the need for an east-west connector that seems to offer nothing to the citizens of Highland either now or in the future, but perhaps a great convenience at our expense to our neighboring cities who will not be traveling anywhere near our designated commercial developments as they add further wear and tear to roads we will build and have to maintain perhaps without their participation.
Inasmuch as the city council has not yet made a decision and that further input will be solicited by a meeting to be properly announced and scheduled in about a month, I would encourage the citizens of our fair city to truly ponder the need for the Murdock Connector. Let's maintain the roads we have where a clear need has been established and forgo debt where no need exists.
I heard no favorable comments regarding further indebtedness. Toward the end of the public appearances I made the following comments amplified somewhat by the reasoning behind them:
1) In spite of the assurances that no formal decisions on the bond had been made, we were aware of public statements regarding the creation of an east-west connector road to be referred to as the Murdock Connector which would be funded by the proposed fund.
2)That my particular neighborhood had felt "hoodwinked" as two homeowners in our subdivision had been approached by the mayor and informed that their homes and properties were to be acquired by the city in an eminent domain action to make way for this connection through the southern portion of our subdivision and that acquisition would also entail encroachment on a park owned by our homeowners association.
3) That an east-west connector road had previously been proposed approximately five years ago and had then been dismissed as unnecessary secondary to the poor development of 4800 West as a collector route. Additionally, the residents of the western portions of Highland no longer needed access to Lone Peak High School on the east, they having been diverted to American Fork High School on the south.
4) Referring to an earlier comment that sales tax revenues had suffered with the building of the Smith's Marketplace to our west, creating a direct access to the new Walmart currently being constructed in Cedar Hills might add the final nail in the coffin to Kohler's potential future non-viability and lead to further loss of city revenues.
5) That Central Park in the middle of Manhattan represented one example of a decision to allow an "inconvenience" in traffic access to trump the needs of a quick commute in favor of attractive green space.
6) That prior to inviting further debt for new road construction, the citizens of Highland and its elected officials should once again revisit the need for an east-west connector that seems to offer nothing to the citizens of Highland either now or in the future, but perhaps a great convenience at our expense to our neighboring cities who will not be traveling anywhere near our designated commercial developments as they add further wear and tear to roads we will build and have to maintain perhaps without their participation.
Inasmuch as the city council has not yet made a decision and that further input will be solicited by a meeting to be properly announced and scheduled in about a month, I would encourage the citizens of our fair city to truly ponder the need for the Murdock Connector. Let's maintain the roads we have where a clear need has been established and forgo debt where no need exists.
"Official" Public Hearing on Bond to be Delayed
At last night's city council meeting Highland City resident, Darrell Ostler informed all present that the public hearing portion of the meeting was illegal and in violation of Utah law because proper public notice was not given.
According to the Utah Code Annotated title 11, chapter 14, at least two weeks notice must be given in a local newspaper AND on the official state web site. The newspaper notice was compliant but the web site notice was posted only six days prior to the meeting.
Ostler requested that the city council ensure that another public hearing be rescheduled with proper notice. This action will allow more time for city residents to gather and file petitions.
Mayor Franson commented just before the public meeting portion of last night's meeting saying that he checked with the city attorney and confirmed that a "miscommunication" had occurred somehow that will make it necessary to schedule a new public hearing and that it will most likely take place in one month or so.
Franson went on to say that because so many residents turned out to comment on the proposed bond, that he would allow such comments tonight, even though the official public hearing would be rescheduled.
According to the Utah Code Annotated title 11, chapter 14, at least two weeks notice must be given in a local newspaper AND on the official state web site. The newspaper notice was compliant but the web site notice was posted only six days prior to the meeting.
Ostler requested that the city council ensure that another public hearing be rescheduled with proper notice. This action will allow more time for city residents to gather and file petitions.
Mayor Franson commented just before the public meeting portion of last night's meeting saying that he checked with the city attorney and confirmed that a "miscommunication" had occurred somehow that will make it necessary to schedule a new public hearing and that it will most likely take place in one month or so.
Franson went on to say that because so many residents turned out to comment on the proposed bond, that he would allow such comments tonight, even though the official public hearing would be rescheduled.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Let's Hear It For More Debt
One of the reasons given for moving ahead with a $5 million road bond is that prices are currently a bargain for road construction with oil prices falling from their record highs last year. Knowing the reliability of OPEC to have our best interests at heart and noting that gas prices are rising again, I suspect that by the time we really had the engineering in place to improve our roads, these bargain prices will be long gone.
Indebtedness now on a promise of forthcoming funds makes about as much sense as the "economic stimulus package" being signed by President Obama today where the economy is somehow going to be helped by going into further debt. Most of us watch our finances pretty carefully, especially at this time.
Now is the wrong time for our Highland city fathers to be putting us into further debt. I'd be interested in hearing what the majority of Highlanders say by putting this to a vote. Get your name on the petitions being circulated if you haven't already done so to bring this matter before the full citizenry of the city.
Indebtedness now on a promise of forthcoming funds makes about as much sense as the "economic stimulus package" being signed by President Obama today where the economy is somehow going to be helped by going into further debt. Most of us watch our finances pretty carefully, especially at this time.
Now is the wrong time for our Highland city fathers to be putting us into further debt. I'd be interested in hearing what the majority of Highlanders say by putting this to a vote. Get your name on the petitions being circulated if you haven't already done so to bring this matter before the full citizenry of the city.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Lone Peak edition 2/12/09
Daily Herald
Mike Spain decries bond -- During the appearances portion of the Feb. 3 Highland City Council meeting resident Mike Spain asked the council to not approve the proposed bond for road projects. "The financial environment is shrinking as is the property tax base. We could find ourselves in debt with no way to pay it off." Mayor Jay Franson told him there would be a public hearing on the bond in two weeks with a decision to be made by the council on March 3.
Daily Herald
Mike Spain decries bond -- During the appearances portion of the Feb. 3 Highland City Council meeting resident Mike Spain asked the council to not approve the proposed bond for road projects. "The financial environment is shrinking as is the property tax base. We could find ourselves in debt with no way to pay it off." Mayor Jay Franson told him there would be a public hearing on the bond in two weeks with a decision to be made by the council on March 3.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Letter to editor of Daily Herald
Highland's novel response
Daily Herald
Highland City has adopted a novel response to the current economic crisis, one which shows great faith in the future. Despite decreased city revenues, on Jan. 20 council members adopted a resolution to authorize the issuance of up to $5,000,000 in new bonds. Added to Highland City's current indebtedness of approximately $14 million, this would be an equivalent debt load of $7,600 per household (estimated 2,500 homes; based on 2004 population). The bond resolution was adopted without consulting the citizens, who most likely would have sided with American Fork citizens in refusing additional debt.
•Trixie Walker, Highland
Daily Herald
Highland City has adopted a novel response to the current economic crisis, one which shows great faith in the future. Despite decreased city revenues, on Jan. 20 council members adopted a resolution to authorize the issuance of up to $5,000,000 in new bonds. Added to Highland City's current indebtedness of approximately $14 million, this would be an equivalent debt load of $7,600 per household (estimated 2,500 homes; based on 2004 population). The bond resolution was adopted without consulting the citizens, who most likely would have sided with American Fork citizens in refusing additional debt.
•Trixie Walker, Highland
Friday, February 6, 2009
Daily Herald Article on the $5 million Bond
Higland residents protest road bond
Caleb Warnock - DAILY HERALD
Some Highland residents are looking to stop the city from borrowing up to $5 million for new roads. Saying Highland should not be taking on large debt in uncharted economic times, a group of the city's residents has been going door to door to encourage other residents to call council members and protest the move.
Now the residents say they are putting together a petition asking the council to put the debt on the ballot for public approval, rather than a vote of the council.
Last month, council members voted to authorize the sale of up to $5 million in municipal bonds toward road work. That vote sets the process in motion, but a final vote as early as Feb. 15 will set the final amount of the bonds, according to city staff.
Residents said on Wednesday that they are confident they can convince the council and other residents that taking on debt right now is the wrong move. They are asking all concerned residents to contact council members.
Councilwoman Claudia Stillman said the council may discuss taking out $3.3 million in debt, rather than $5 million.
In the February issue of the city newsletter, Mayor Jay Franson argued that the city should take on the debt now because there are other government funds available to help match road building expenses.
"Because of the favorable construction climate, low interest rates and pressing road needs, I have recommended to the City Council that they consider borrowing money for the purpose of building new roads and improving other roads that are in need of improvement," Franson wrote in the newsletter.
The mayor said he would like the money used to fix 6000 West and to match Utah County funds to build an east-west connector linking the west part of Highland to 4800 West with a direct connection to the freeway and State Road 92.
"This connection will make southbound travel much more convenient and avoid the congestion of 100 East and State Street in American Fork," Mayor Franson said. "It is unlikely that such an opportunity will come again soon."
Not so fast, say some residents. "Their logic is that it would be dumb not to go into debt now because it is such a good deal, but I don't think that holds," said resident Cathy Smith. "I think Highland already has a lot of debt per citizen."
In a meeting with the Daily Herald, about a dozen residents said they want the council to listen to their concerns and stop the bond from ever happening.
"I think it is possible to turn this around," said resident Janet Wadsworth. "I think it is possible there could be no bond, or a small bond."
Residents said they have been going door to door to gather opposition to the mayor's proposal. At the very least, they said, they would like the bond issue dropped until the economy is much better off.
Residents need more information, they said. Franson, in the city newsletter, said the city would use about $500,000 of state road funds that it receives each year to pay the annual principal and interest on the bonds, but residents speaking to the Daily Herald said that historically that money has not been enough to even maintain existing Highland roads and questioned how the city would continue maintenance on existing roads when state road money is committed to bond payments.
"We are opposed to going into debt," Wadsworth said. "They should maintain the roads they have before they create more to maintain."
Caleb Warnock - DAILY HERALD
Some Highland residents are looking to stop the city from borrowing up to $5 million for new roads. Saying Highland should not be taking on large debt in uncharted economic times, a group of the city's residents has been going door to door to encourage other residents to call council members and protest the move.
Now the residents say they are putting together a petition asking the council to put the debt on the ballot for public approval, rather than a vote of the council.
Last month, council members voted to authorize the sale of up to $5 million in municipal bonds toward road work. That vote sets the process in motion, but a final vote as early as Feb. 15 will set the final amount of the bonds, according to city staff.
Residents said on Wednesday that they are confident they can convince the council and other residents that taking on debt right now is the wrong move. They are asking all concerned residents to contact council members.
Councilwoman Claudia Stillman said the council may discuss taking out $3.3 million in debt, rather than $5 million.
In the February issue of the city newsletter, Mayor Jay Franson argued that the city should take on the debt now because there are other government funds available to help match road building expenses.
"Because of the favorable construction climate, low interest rates and pressing road needs, I have recommended to the City Council that they consider borrowing money for the purpose of building new roads and improving other roads that are in need of improvement," Franson wrote in the newsletter.
The mayor said he would like the money used to fix 6000 West and to match Utah County funds to build an east-west connector linking the west part of Highland to 4800 West with a direct connection to the freeway and State Road 92.
"This connection will make southbound travel much more convenient and avoid the congestion of 100 East and State Street in American Fork," Mayor Franson said. "It is unlikely that such an opportunity will come again soon."
Not so fast, say some residents. "Their logic is that it would be dumb not to go into debt now because it is such a good deal, but I don't think that holds," said resident Cathy Smith. "I think Highland already has a lot of debt per citizen."
In a meeting with the Daily Herald, about a dozen residents said they want the council to listen to their concerns and stop the bond from ever happening.
"I think it is possible to turn this around," said resident Janet Wadsworth. "I think it is possible there could be no bond, or a small bond."
Residents said they have been going door to door to gather opposition to the mayor's proposal. At the very least, they said, they would like the bond issue dropped until the economy is much better off.
Residents need more information, they said. Franson, in the city newsletter, said the city would use about $500,000 of state road funds that it receives each year to pay the annual principal and interest on the bonds, but residents speaking to the Daily Herald said that historically that money has not been enough to even maintain existing Highland roads and questioned how the city would continue maintenance on existing roads when state road money is committed to bond payments.
"We are opposed to going into debt," Wadsworth said. "They should maintain the roads they have before they create more to maintain."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)