Regular Meeting
January 19, 2010
The Mayor and Council
of the City of Fairbury met in regular session in the Council Chambers
located at 612 D Street, Fairbury, Nebraska, on the 19th day of
January 2010,
at 7:30 p.m. Mayor
Homer L. Ward called the meeting to order.
Notice of meeting was
given in advance thereof by publication in the Fairbury Journal News,
Fairbury, Nebraska, the designated method of giving notice, as shown by
affidavit of publication. The Open Meetings Act was posted in the meeting
room and pointed out by Mayor Ward as required by law.
Roll call found the
following Council Members present: Doug Brown, Ed Friesen, Roger Bailey,
Beryl Lueders, Shirley Bender, Brad Kuzelka, and Kelly Davis. Absent: Don
Trimm.
Mayor Ward called for
the submittal of forms to request future agenda items. No forms were
submitted during the meeting.
Mayor Ward read the
Consent Agenda:
1.
Approval of the minutes of the
regular meeting of January 5, 2010.
2.
Approval of claims.
3.
Approval of the December 2009
Reconciliation Report.
4.
Approval of the reappointment
of Ron Schacht to the Board of Public Works. Term to expire January 2014.
5.
Approval of the appointment of
Roger Bundy to the Board of Public Works. Term to expire January 2014.
Bailey moved to approve
the Consent Agenda. Motion seconded by Kuzelka. On roll call Brown,
Friesen, Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Kuzelka, and Davis voted “yes.” Trimm
absent. Motion carried.
Mayor Ward opened the
Public Hearing concerning the Economic Development Plan Document for the
reauthorization of the Economic Development Program under the Local Option
Municipal Economic Development Act. City Attorney David Bargen addressed
the Council. Bargen stated he will give an overview of the legal review he
performed of the proposed plan; the current Economic Development Plan
expires March 2010 and needs to be reauthorized. The original plan was
authorized for ten years under the Local Option Municipal Development Act of
Nebraska and was the first go around for cities of Nebraska under that
statute to have a program. Fairbury was one of the first cities to utilize
the program and it now needs to be reauthorized. Bargen did a legal review
of this plan by checking current State Statute regulations, checked with the
Department of Economic Development, talked with their field office in
Kearney who oversees these programs, and also talked to David Taladay who is
the director of Southeast Nebraska Development District (SENDD) and
administers the program now. Bargen took the original plan that was drafted
ten years ago and made modifications to that plan based on this
information. Bargen had to double check the time frame of which these
programs can be in existence; current State Statute that authorizes these
programs does not state that the LB840 programs have to be limited to a
certain number of years; but within the Statutes, it implies so in several
areas, that some limit needs to be set for the program, needs to be some
sunset period in the program; that is the implication. The original idea
was to make Fairbury’s new plan perpetual to save the City from having to
come back and reauthorize again and because there are two ways stated in
the Statute to repeal the program; one way is a two thirds vote of the
Council to repeal the program and the other is a petition process done by a
citizen, which would also repeal the program. It was decided to do a ten
year sunset again like the original plan, just so there is no question about
it. Originally, for this new document on page 6, it was going to state
this tax will remain in force for so long as the economic development
program exists and sales tax is estimated to be $185,000 each year of the
economic development program. It was decided to change this to have a
sunset so it now reads this tax will remain in force for a period of ten
years, beginning on or about June 1, 2010 and sales tax is estimated to be
$1,850,000 over the ten year period and ending ten years thereafter, on or
about May 31, 2020. The Mayor also had a committee looking over the
economic development plan and Bargen had reviewed it for legal
considerations. The Statute requires a process to go through to authorize a
plan; must provide a plan, have a public hearing, and the Council shall
approve the plan by adopting it through a resolution. Bargen then
highlighted some of the amendments to the plan document:
Page 2 ~ wanted to highlight that some of
the funds of the program can be used for infrastructure by adding; “The
ability of this community to grow relies upon a strong infrastructure base
consisting of good streets, sewers, and utilities. This program will allow
for a planned program of annual infrastructure improvements.” “To realize
Fairbury’s community and economic development strategy, a portion of all
funds collected each year to fund this economic development program may be
earmarked for expenditure on public works improvements, including but not
limited to those public works improvements mentioned in this economic
development plan, that would benefit a qualifying business or businesses
without regard to whether that business is identified at the time the
project or program is initiated or is to be determined by specific means at
some time in the future.”
Page 3 ~ eligible activities under the
economic development program may include, but shall not be limited to, the
following: added 1) performance-based grants or loans tied to the creation
and/or retention of a specified number of full-time jobs (full-time job
defined as a position of employment consisting of at least 2000 work hours
per year; 2) grants or loans for public works improvements; 3) “expenditures
for public works improvements that would benefit a qualifying business or
businesses, without regard to whether that business is identified at the
time the project or program is initiated or is to be determined by specified
means at some time in the future. Such public works improvements may extend
beyond the corporate limits of the City of Fairbury; eligible public works
improvements shall include, but not be limited to: streets; water, sewer,
gas, electric, and storm drainage; railroad extension and spurs;
telecommunications, cable, fiber optic, satellite service; airport expansion
and upgrades;” 5) “construction of facilities, structures, and/or
appurtenances for new or proposed development or on a speculative basis to
attract new business or industry. Such facilities, structures, and
appurtenances are not required to be within the corporate limits of the City
of Fairbury.” 7) expenses for business recruitment and community promotional
activities and related administrative expenses;
Page 4 ~ 18) “a revolving loan fund from
which low interest or performance based loans will be made to qualifying
businesses on a match basis from the grantee business and based upon job
creation and/or retention, extra consideration given to jobs above the
average wage scale for the community. At that time a loan fund is created
under the Economic Development Program, all statutory requirements under the
Local Option Municipal Economic Development Act regarding the creation of a
loan fund, including specifying those items currently found in Neb. Rev.
Stat. § 18-2711, shall be fulfilled
through passage, pursuant to this Economic Development Plan, by the City
Council and any other reviewing authority as established by the City
Council, of rules and regulations addressing such requirements.”
Page 5 ~ added 9) “any business that derives
its principal source of income from retail trade. Subject to prevailing
law, no more than forty percent of the total revenue generated for the
City’s economic development program in any twelve-month period and no more
than twenty percent of the total revenue of the City’s economic development
program in any five-year period, commencing from the date of municipal
approval of this economic development program, shall be used by the City for
or devoted to the use of retail trade businesses. For purposes of this
section, retail trade shall mean a business which is principally engaged in
the sale of goods or commodities to ultimate consumers for their own use or
consumption and not for resale.” (This was language taken right from the
Statute.)
Page 6 ~ changed the amount for
infrastructure from $75000 to $92500, though those categories and amounts
are ultimately up to the Council to decide; also under the application
process deleted Jefferson County Economic Development Corporation and stated
the intent of the City of Fairbury is to contract with an outside entity,
likely a non-profit corporation to administer the Economic Development
Program.
Page 7 ~ this mainly addresses due process
issues; applications getting the full review that they should.
Page 9 ~ includes the roll of the Council ~
the City Council will have final authority on expenditure of funds in
support of the Economic Development Program; will contract with an
organization to act as Program Administrator; will have ultimate
responsibility for the Economic Development Program and may establish all
regulations and review procedures for the program; will adopt uniform
criteria, after reviewing criteria proposed by the Program Administrator,
for the evaluation of applications for financial assistance, and will
approve the membership of the Citizen’s Advisory Review Committee.
Page 10 ~ under the process to insure
confidentiality of business information received added 4) “review by the
City Attorney of all public records requests that request documents related
to a business applying for assistance from the economic development
program.”
Page 11 ~ the current document did not
address land issues very well, so added “land explicitly designated as
incentives for economic development shall be identified by the City and/or
Industrial Site Evaluation teams organized by the City or the Program
Administrator of the Economic Development Program, or by other review bodies
created by the City Council, and shall be under control of the City, Program
Administrator, or other review authority created by the City Council, for
the benefit of the Economic Development Program, for transfer or sale in
development efforts.”
Council member Doug
Brown mentioned the tax relief of the excess of the $185000 going back into
the general fund. Council member Beryl Lueders questioned if the language
for the ballot should include something about the tax relief; if this would
help for the passage of this plan with the voters. Bargen stated the
experience of other communities has been that the more information the
public gets showing a benefit of the plan, the more the public understands
and agrees with it; how the plan should be presented to the public is a
policy decision for the Council. Council member Ed Friesen stated he
thought the increase in the amount that could be used for infrastructure,
especially streets, would be a strong selling point. Council member Shirley
Bender questioned if this plan has any limitations of how often someone can
get a grant in this program. Bargen stated the current plan does not, but
language in the plan requires the Council to follow the governing statute if
a loan program is created, and the statute does require such limitations if
a loan program is in place. Program Administrator could make this more
precise or could amend the plan to make it part of the plan. No
one else addressed the Council during the public hearing. Mayor Ward
declared the hearing closed.
Bender moved to set a
public hearing concerning the City of Fairbury, Nebraska 1 & 6 Year Street
Improvement Plan for 2010-2015 for February 2, 2010 at 7:30 p.m. Motion
seconded by Kuzelka. On roll call,
Brown, Friesen, Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Kuzelka, and Davis voted “yes.”
Trimm absent. Motion carried.
Davis moved to approve
the request from the Board of Public Works (BOPW) to go out for bids to
purchase a pivot irrigation system for the Sewer Plant Farm by the Waste
Water Treatment Plant. Motion seconded by Brown.
Mike Beachler, Superintendent of Utilities, stated the current system was
purchased used from Reinke Manufacturing in 1990. They’ve been having
continual problems with the current system; need to get something more
reliable. Beachler stated he thought the new system would be between $50000
- $55000; it’s an eight tower system. They will send out some bid
applications to different businesses and also advertise in the newspaper.
Whoever gets the bid will remove the old system and install the new system.
Beachler stated the reason the BOPW is in the farming industry is because
of the sludge application they have to do from the sewer disposal plant.
The irrigation was added in 1990 to use some of the affluent that comes from
the plant, instead of going into the river, it goes onto the land which is
very favorable from the DEQ stand point.
Brown questioned if their would be any
benefit to the City leasing a pivot instead of owning one; as he knows
several farmers that are leasing pivots. Beachler stated the only drawback
may be that it is not normal well water going through the system and it has
some calcium deposit inside. On roll call Brown, Friesen, Bailey, Lueders,
Bender, Kuzelka, and Davis voted “yes.” Trimm absent. Motion carried.
Mayor Ward stated the
City has received the following three bids for the lease of the Industrial
Park farmland located in the S˝ of the NEĽ of 11-2-2:
Name of
Bidder Bid Price on 50.4 Bid Price on 7.2
Total Annual Bid
Cultivated Acres
Grassland Acres
Terry
Bramhall &
Neil
Lucking $90.00 per acre $20.00 per acre
$4,680.00
Dave
Banahan $79.90 per acre $38.19 per acre
$4,301.93
Brian
Starck $82.00 per acre $20.00 per acre
$4,276.80
Bender moved to
approve the high bid from Terry Bramhall and Neil Lucking, in the amount of
$90.00 per acre on 50.4 cultivated acres and $20.00 per acre on 7.2
grassland acres with a total annual bid of $4,680.00, and authorizing Mayor
Ward to sign the Cash Rent Farm Lease Agreement. Motion seconded by
Kuzelka. On roll call, Brown, Friesen, Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Kuzelka,
and Davis voted “yes.” Trimm absent. Motion carried.
Bailey moved to
approve the recommendation from the Public Works Committee regarding the
acceptance of the proposal received from Southeast Nebraska Development
District (SENDD) in the amount of $1,500.00 for grant administrator for the
2008 CDBG Storm Sewer study grant. Motion seconded by Brown. On roll
call, Brown, Friesen, Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Kuzelka, and Davis voted
“yes.” Trimm absent. Motion carried.
Resolution No. 758
adopting the Economic Development Plan for the City of Fairbury Economic
Development Program and to provide for the ballot language pertaining to the
same, pursuant to the Nebraska Local Option Municipal Economic Development
Act.; Bargen stated the Resolution provided to the Council at this meeting
had been changed from the one in the council packets to reflect the ten year
sunset period. Also on page 2, section e, added bonds to the additional
funds. The previous ballot did not include this language regarding the
bonds; the statute states the bond language should be included on the ballot
and this should match the plan document; also added “the City shall have the
ability to issue bonds to provide funds to carry out the economic
development program.” This Resolution is the actual document that
incorporates and adopts the plan and puts everything into motion. The plan
will be attached to the Resolution as Exhibit A. Bender moved to adopt
Resolution No. 758 as presented with changes to the City Council at this
meeting, adopting the Economic Development Plan as presented with changes to
the City Council at this meeting. Motion seconded by Bailey. On roll call,
Brown, Friesen, Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Davis, and Kuzelka voted “yes.”
Trimm absent. Motion carried.
Bender moved to adjourn
the meeting. Motion seconded by Friesen. On roll call, Brown, Friesen,
Bailey, Lueders, Bender, Kuzelka, and Davis voted “yes.” Trimm absent.
Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Homer L. Ward, Mayor
ATTEST: Sharyl
Preston, City Clerk
