Much ado about -- what?

Highland news from the Lone Peak Press and the Daily Herald.

Highland council doesn't 'have the facts' for roads bond

Posted by: Our Towns Moderator on March 18, 2009 at 2:00AM EST

In Highland on Tuesday there was much ado about -- what? More than 100 residents gathered to speak out about the city potentially floating a bond for roads. Although the city has held a handful of meetings on the issue, once again no one was able to tell residents how much the city might want to borrow, what it would be used for, and why.
City officials said no decision on the matter is expected for months.
"This is not an easy decision because we just don't have the facts," said Councilman Brian Braithwaite after listening to more than an hour and a half of public comment.
Council members have already voted preliminary approval to borrow up to $5 million for roads. Councilwoman Kathryn Schramm warned that the consequences could be stark, and that the city might already be in a "precarious" financial position.
The majority of those who spoke on Tuesday did not take well to the lack of information, alternately pleading for and demanding transparency from the city. Other residents said the city should go forward with the undefined bond, saying it was supported by "the silent majority."
The public hearing began with a reversal. The first resident asked the mayor to please first explain "exactly the bond issue, the money available, and why you are considering it... I think there is a lot of confusion out there."
Mayor Jay Franson struggled to define "exactly the bond issue," saying the city would like to use a portion of $500,000 a year in state road money to repay the bond. When asked about using the money to build a controversial east-west corridor, Franson said only that there are "no specific strings tied to what this would be used for."
Because it was unclear what any potential debt might be used for, at times the hearing deteriorated into a debate over whether there should be an east-west corridor built in the city. Mayor Franson has said he would like the city to use some of the borrowed money for such a corridor, though no one in the city has proposed that or any other plan for the controversial bond.
Even late in the meeting, confusion reigned. Councilman Larry Mendenhall scolded the public, saying "the public perception has been that $5 million is on the table, but that has never been the case."
Councilwoman Kathryn Schramm then read an agenda from a recent meeting at which the Council voted to give preliminary approval for a bond "up to $5 million."
Schramm said she was deeply concerned over the state of the city's finances, and that her research showed the city may now be obligated to pay $1 million a month on its debt, but the sales tax and impact fees needed to make those payments are shrinking.
"I have to feel we are kind of in a precarious way," she said, detailing existing city debt that "I don't know how we are going to repay ... I'm really concerned."
In recent months the city has already obligated itself for large road projects that Schramm said she did not think were necessary, and would compete for the same money the city now proposes to use to repay any proposed bond.
To add to the confusion, the city appeared to confirm that the whole effort to gather public opinion will have to be redone months from now when the city does make some decisions about how any borrowed money for roads would be used.