[Music]
yeah
[Music]
he
[Music]
he
[Music]
yeah
[Music]
yeah
[Music]
he
[Music]
yeah
[Music]
he
[Music]
I'd like to call to order this
connecting city council committee
meeting for Monday October 16th 2023 and
turn it over to Mr M for the finance
committee thank you I would like to call
the finance committee to order and the
first item is a 2023 emergency vehicle
uplift m point
please you I am Sergeant Matt Point here
on behalf of SKC PD and we're just
looking for your permission to enter a
contact with Auto Solutions to upit our
vehicles they came in as the lowest
bidder of two
biders any questions I'm second all in
favor I thank
you is that simple
the next item is increasing the maximum
income from New York real real property
tax
exemption um Mr Williams yes thank you
uh so excited to have this conversation
back uh we have with us miss makoy who's
bringing her findings as she was able to
gather over the last month um definitely
looking forward to uh reviewing that
with the rest of you and discussing just
how we can make sure we're providing the
appropriate funds uh to our seniors in
the in the community to make sure that
with the recent increases we aren't
inadvertently um excluding individuals
that we do know should U meet these
categories
so and I believe you have some
information to
pass I ran through a couple of different
scenarios and tried to
sorry um just yeah there's four
different four different pieces of
paper
[Applause]
trying to
help
something
okay let's
[Applause]
go
you have
enough
yeah
um okay so the things I just handed out
I worked up some information today um
the first thing I want to show you is um
it is a table and it has at the top
participant and income and then um yeah
so that that's the first thing I'd like
to take a look at and I actually think I
may have been a
away okay so this we took a look at all
of the people who did not get um the
exemption renewed this year because of
income level um so this is a table with
all that there were 84 people who
applied who did not get uh the renewal
this year so I and in in here I kind of
set at what the current you know the
what we have the current level but then
what if we looked at different scenarios
so say we raised it by $3,000 how many
of these people would get would have
gotten the exemption this year same
thing went up to 45,000 which is the two
scenarios that I'm going to pose to you
um um as we talk through this uh so this
is just there's a lot of um things that
are not predictable um income every year
for folks is is it's tough for us to say
how many people might actually apply for
the exemption and or qualify for it
because uh you could have a oneoff year
where you take money out of your
retirement or for some you sell a house
so that ends up going on the income tax
return and we count that as income um so
a lot of people like you'll see that the
there's a wide range of income in here
um from 35,000 up to 245,000
um while I don't have the specific
scenarios in it is likely one of those
kind of things where somebody takes
money out of something or they receive
you know some kind of
inheritance um so being able to predict
going forward how many people that might
affect or how many people might not
qualify is is difficult so what I did um
you can take a look at I I put in here
also the current the current scale that
we have and that's the one that it says
at the top um less than
29,000 sorry I didn't say that's that's
just what our current scale is what
we've been using since
2009 um the first scenario that that I
wanted to bring to your attention is the
one that says less than
32,000 and that's the first um that's
looking at you know was there a midpoint
in the that scale of incomes um just
taking a a shot at something um I put
that together and then took a look at um
you'll see in there that I have
information about how many people would
have qualified in each um category of
the
exemption and you know again not
matching these people up to what their
actual um assessed value is but I took
$100,000 if their homes were assessed at
$100,000 and you took a look at how many
people would get each percentage off um
looking at the scenario one if we were
only to raise it up uh
$3,000 then you you'd look at you know
if it was $100,000 that everyone's house
was you're looking at a total amount of
taxes roughly just shy of $5,000 that we
you know that would have not come into
the city because of having the increase
I used last year's tax rate because we
don't know what the tax rate is this
year um and but looked at the people
that we denied this year for the
exemption um did the same thing then
with say we went up to 45,000 as the um
it would be actually 37,000 would be the
lowest amount um 45 would be the maximum
uh limit and that was quite a
significant difference um in looking at
it would have been $199,200
um in taxes and that's and this is just
putting out there you know $100,000 as
aess value versus you know it could
range anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000
and higher um so it's there is there is
a financial impact the higher we go um
the other idea is that if you stay on
the lower end of a scale there's room
for movement if social security goes up
in the future um again like it did in
2021 it's really again it's really hard
to predict how many people would um but
we did see actually we saw a pretty sign
ific reduction in the number of people
that actually applied for the exemption
um new applicants this year I'm sorry a
reduction um reduction in the number of
people who applied um this year versus I can't I you know I mean some some
thoughts were that we came off of a
2-year period where we had extended
everyone's exemptions because of coid um
so maybe there were people that forgot
or you know
decided for whatever reason didn't apply
um but
um so I can't you know again those those
things that are kind of not predictable
for the
future um but you know as you as you
raise the limit up you get more and more
people who are in those that that
bracket of
50% um and so that's you know even even
those some those like 40
45 um there's a lot in there too it's
the best way I could predict any kind of
financial impact uh the city is doing it
like that um using the the last year's
tax
rate please so I just I just want to be
clear so on the chart that starts with
the
3556
M this is you said the number of people
so there's 84 people that these are
84 individual people who applied okay
and were denied the exemption because of
the income level okay and then just but
on this other sheet and we're denied let
me just write that down yes and the
other one no the other one this one
that's 48
households I added it up quickly but um
okay and it it does correspond to so
this first section this first one that I
gave you it corresponds with the
highlighting that you see so the first
one the highlighting is um those are the
number of people who would have so there
would have been
29 that would qualify for under the
first scenario if we raised it only by
3,000 okay um and then the same thing
there were there would be 50 people um
if it
was hopefully my numbers were not too
far off um there would be 50 people that
would would qualify if it was raised up
to 45 as opposed to gotcha gotcha okay
yep and then
50 Mr M so then 57 people if was raised
up to if it was raised up to like the
top and I didn't I didn't run that
because I just I I don't think that
that's a wise option um to go that that
High um plus I think in our last
discussion it does it was really geared
towards some of those downstate places
where um incomes are higher just the
total over all income is higher for so
thanks John go ahead please do you have
any idea of obviously you won't be able
to calculate but the number of people
who will be entering
into um the
exemptions in the next year or so how
many additional people I it's it's
really like I said it's hard to predict
because we've got we've got but you
could get a total amount and I
understand you can't figure out how many
would actually go for it I understand
but do we know how many total would be
coming into the availability of applying
for the exemption I I mean it would be a
matter of knowing who's going to turn 65
in the next year because that's the threshold for this to number
one to be able to apply at all is to be
65 and then number two they have to
provide us with their 2022 income tax
return um for us to take a look at what
the income level is so you know I think
me let me take a look at this
um we had 229 people not renew the
exemption um or property was transferred
so they didn't have the opportunity um
and we only
had 68 new people apply this past
year um and that's you know we do send
out renewal notices to everyone who
currently has the exemption um so we can
you know predict that but any any new
folks um coming in we can't really
predict that
well how many people get the exemption
now one way or the other there's there's
probably a thousand households right now
um that get the the senior lwi income
exemption now we're also talking this is also for disability senior or
excuse me disabled and low income um
that's that's a little bit more
consistent
um that one is and so that would affect
the two
um
so would it be fair to say a good
estimate would it be anywhere from 65 to
let's say 130 140 people new people
flying sure you know I mean that's yeah
I think you could go with that
range um just given the number that we
had this year um now we do have people
that have you know any for anybody who
had the exemption before may not have
received it this year they would likely
come back to us and apply and I know
there are several instances of that um
because we had conversations with folks
last year
so so definitely thank you for gathering
this information I think it's safe to
say that we we all are in agreement that
raising it to the maximum $50,000 is an
OP or recommended option that you're
clearly stating uh definitely taken into
consideration that the city hasn't risen
these exemptions in quite a quite a bit
of time
um so I guess and get a a pulse of where
the entire council is where individuals
like to elect to what they're leaning
towards or have time to um all over all
the data that is a lot of
numbers yeah and I I mean I can run
other scenario I just those were two
that I happened to um one that I had
done and then um in speaking with Mr
Williams um I ran another one today just
to take a look at it
so but I'm happy to you know we need to
come back do it or whatever
go ahead so so I guess my thought is
around like you know you know if you
know we raise it then you know how do
we have you know what's the mechanism to
capture people who haden't been able to
um doe to you know do to the changeing
how do we you know what are the
mechanisms to um make sure that they're
aware because I think I mean we
certainly we've we've done legal notices
before we can put something in the
newspaper to advertise it I mean I think
it we've we've gotten a fair number of
calls um to our office like because of
hearing it on the news and and um people
asking wanting to know what the limit is
and you know what and so you know I have
said to people kind of on hold until
decisions are made but um so I think the
word is out there but there's certainly
um I think it would be tough you we do a
mass mailing and probably not worth the
cost of doing it um but but at least
spreading the word and letting people
know and um in various
um Outlets Facebook social media but you said that you guys kind mail out now
for time for people to quote unquote
recertify I don't know if that's it's just for the folks who currently
have it it's it's to so they and that
would we could do that to that list
right yeah absolutely oh yeah for thank
you go ahead please could you just re
clarify again um your thought on why we
saw the reduction in the number of
people that applied um in 2023 I know
you mentioned it but I just wanted sure
um I hear it again I think I mean I
think Co so for the past 2 years because
of um state law and and um changes with
Co stuff we were able to just extend the
exemption folks okay so you know and
that that probably also you know I don't
want to say it hurt us a little bit but
when we got to the point of looking at
people's income this year there was
quite a difference between what they had
last submitted to us and then what they
submitted this year which is why there
were a lot of people that didn't get the
exemption or that you know um and I
think some of that is also probably
because people just weren't thinking
about it because for two years in a row
we didn't require them
to um we just kept them at the same
level that they had been
at thank
[Music]
you any questions
so what is the time frame if you when we
want to do this that we need to make a
final decision sure um we've got until
March 1st so we've got a while we won't we will accept applications up
until March 1st and we generally don't
review anything until after that point
so there's there's definitely a lot of
time doesn't doesn't have to be a
decision that um is made right away so
it's just a go ahead Mr this is
currently codified in the city code
section
2341 um so if the council's inclined to
change this have to be a call for public
hearing um to amend the code okay thank
you yeah M March 1st that's that's
really the that um I would want to say
that's probably a good deadline
okay okay yeah in
earli yeah I was going to speak to that
point I definitely want to respect
people's ability to to dissect this
information slightly further I would
feel comfortable maybe bringing it back
in another two weeks I I think taking
advantage of the time we have now to to
Mr Golden's Point um processing through
the adjustment to the city code and then
having it all solidified by on March 1st
um getting it off the our thought
process so you can focus on some other
things so if if we're planning on moving
this forward why don't we call for the
public hearing and utilize the time
frame the public hearing will be in 4
weeks
time but now will give us enough um time
to review what we have in front of us
here then come
back to process it out three weeks on
the public hearing three weeks 3
weeks so that will be enough time so I'd
say as long as everyone's in agreement
that we're going to be adjusting this in
some shape or form so I think that would
be fair allowing us the time to leverage
both timelines and then going back in
two weeks and adjusting what and
not go ahead please think before we move
forward on a public hearing we need to
have the additional scenarios in place
especially with the
additional uh people who would be
participating in the program so we know
a roughly good appr proximization of the
costs and we also need a plan on how
we're going to pay for it before we talk
about a public heory because people
should know how that's going to be done
can you get those numers in two weeks or
CL
us um I the par the applicants
participant I mean I can't predict who's
going to that's the I can tell you how
many people we have already who have
applied I can tell you how many people
we have who are going to be renewing but
you know I don't know how many of those
folks are going to be selling their
house or moving moving out of the area
or you know I mean it's so it's just
it's one of those things that you know I
don't I don't even know how I would tell
who's turning 65 in the next year well
we have that information and we could
get a range from 65 to say 130 140 just
to give us a range of what the cost
would be I mean it might take a little
time to get the the individuals who uh
would be turning 65 but I think it's
worth having the numbers before we move
forward so people can understand who's
eligible what they might get and how
it's going to be paid for
I'm going to ask is that something you
can get from your office that M PA is
asking
for um I I can't get the who's over or
who's turning 65 um but like the other
number there's there's some you know I
can tell you how many people are
expected to renew um and I can you know
I can see if I can go back over the
course of I don't I don't know know if
we had that information before Co to see
how many people we had um applying
during that time see what the
fluctuation and numbers were over the
course of um a couple of years go ahead
please we can get the ages from the
county on the real property tax data
looking at who's going to be turning 65
from the property
owners sorry that's that's one piece to
it that that would be your yeah no it
would be that would be the worst case
scenario all the people who turned 65
apply best case scenario is you know a
quarter of those people actually are
income qual qualified but it's good to
know the the numbers yeah espe the year
after go ahead and I I don't think that
we need to rush if we have until March
1st as well I think the ability to be
able to absorb gather data Etc um I I
just don't think that we have to move
quickly with the public hearing yeah but
I'm not sure how much more information
um M Michael R can give us at this point
in time I mean I can you know looking at
um if we had some sort of I mean I can
you know take anywhere between the the
you know 50 and say we had 100 more
people apply this
year um you know just looking at what
the that Financial impact would would be
again if it was $100,000 assessed value
of a home um you know what is the what's
the bigger picture look like um it would
be you know similar to what I had run
for these two scenarios
Mr M if we could just have people
articulate exactly what they would like
to see and then give I would say give
her a month though two weeks is a little
short for all the information and if we
could just give her a month to be able
to do that since we do have to March 1st
which I don't anticipate we will need
until that time um and then we could
move forward and you know do the public
hearing and all of that sounds
good I don't want to rush her through
this process Mr will okay that oh
consider okay you good okay so can we um
can you follow up with a list of the
things that is needed okay additional
information is needed so that
we and I'll see if I can get it I I mean
I'll talk to some other assessors to see
because I know that there're not there's
not a lot of people looking into this
but there are a couple now because they
heard that that SK AC is looking into it
so um I'll see if there's you know not
maybe I'm not able to wrap my head
around another way to predict some of
that I was going to say for I'm able to
gather any of that information we'll
update the
councel so do we need everyone who if I
don't know if she was able to capture
all the conversation that we just having
and what they want so if we could ask
everyone whatever it is they're looking
for to email that those questions either
you or Miss myu so we would know um
which what miss m I would need to U be
looking at okay okay yes that' be great
thank you for thank you appre thank
you okay the next item is allocation of
750,000 in Offa funding 1930 nor B
Street palum Station Miss for yes as you
know the initially we um allocated ARA
funds to stack a Association to uh for
the pump station however because it's
not it's a city building we could not do
that and so therefore we we sended those
funds um back to the city to the ARA
funds uh I would like for us to to
reallocate them to the project knowing
that the city is going to take care of
it so that's that's all this is probably
something we should have talked about
when we res sended but we already uh I
know that some work has already been
done in addition to that so I just want
to reallocate those funds back to the
project to make sure that the project
gets done even though it has to be done
by the city
any any
questions just as council president
points out some money has been used for
exterior work so the number wouldn't be
750,000 and I don't have the exact
number of what has been allocated for
that it's not a huge amount of money but
something everybody agreed to and
something that uh the work was a
necessity that had to be done mhm go
ahead please May or wouldn't we just
take that out of the
750 yes that's so whatever the and it's
how to make the accounting cleaner to
put a number in there of whatever the
remaining funds are to say this is going
to be used
for so it's the 750 minus what we spent
and then that dollar amount will go
forward for the what would be hopefully
primarily
interior okay so you just don't want it
one package the interior out exterior
750 you want to you would like to break
it
out easier for the accountant
to in my mind if it was 750 for the
project whether we did exterior or
interior than it's just 750 and when
it's when we spent it we've spent it
even though we've already spent it I I
knew that too I know that too well I
should say we've encumbered it I don't
know if we've actually expended so so so
I just want to make sure that the
project has what we originally intended
to allocate towards
it any other questions so then wouldn't
it be 750 minus whatever has been
spent well we have to do it for
allocation but if the money's already
been spent hasn't been spent it's been
incumbered well we don't know he just
said I apologize I don't
know come I mean it might be zero in
which case it's 750
because um because we didn't um spend it
we they took out the line item and now
we have to recreate the line item so I
understand that we don't know if it's
spent any yet it's been encumbered has
it been spent yet Mr
uh so let's all right if it's been spent
then we can change that number if it
hasn't been spent and it's only been
encumbered then we could just leave it
at 750 and again because we res sended
it we had to remove it as a wine item
and now we have to put it back as a line
item yes that's correct
M any other discussion may have a motion
to move this move second I'll second it
all in favor all thank you the next item
is the lease purchase agreement for the
fire
department you going take this all right
thank
you okay so we've uh done before with
our fire department trucks uh we're
looking for one replacement AEL and two
pumper trucks and we're looking uh to
get it's actually a sourcewell contract
for Le uh lease purchase um we're
looking to use an escro discount finance
an option would would save the city
around
$290,000 um if we do um move forward
with this the vehicle will be received
by uh fourth quarter of 2025 uh or uh
first quarter of 2026 six uh we
recommend the city council approve this
contract with leasing to
Inc any questions move it second all in
favor I thank you any other business of
for finance to Second all in favor I
thank
you we're now call to order Public
Safety Committee we have one item on the
agenda
tonight all right so correction uh the
first item on the discussion will be
moved to the following week uh just not
having the uh personel to actually brief
it this C is there specific questions on
that that I could
answer so so I would say uh based on
this discussion uh I had with uh
Mr uh with that the with our engineer
Chris Wallen excuse me and John Kio
there have been steps already taking
place with this project and specific
also wanted to have some uh updates regarding what's been been
taking
place it's really been under review
since 2013 when B Boulevard was
upgraded and some of the traffic
patterns again have changed uh the
casino came online more activities
downtown so it's something that we're
continually looking at then it becomes
just adding that turn lane or the I
shouldn't say the the internally is
already there it's just adding the
signal for the actual Lane uh but there
are implications where it would Stack Up
traffic depending on the timing and how
you interface it with other
uh traffic control devices primarily the
one at Liberty in
Erie and we're going to be in a better
position to manage these going forward
always we've added more fiber
connections to ones downtown upgrated
the ones around City
Hall uh so as this all goes in place
that uh hopefully the uh flow of traffic
is going to be smoother and more
efficient just going
forward right thank you Mr Mayor I for
the people listening giving proper
context uh this agenda item was just
address comments we heard from our
previous city council meeting uh where
an individual was speaking about some of
the frustrations and also safety
concerns with respect to Turning uh near
Iran Union uh definitely I I appreciate
the the work that's been done up to this
point and I think this is honestly just
an opportunity to just educate and just
re identify the work that's been going
on um but to the communities this may
they had no idea or I think having a
followup is appropriate to just let them
know what's been going on at the present
time I would still like to hear from Mr
Wen and Mr
coo just on and some of it I would hope
maybe that they could put together a
little bit more than just this one
intersection because there are other uh
call points of interest sometimes if you
always get a green light you think
everything's fine if you get a red light
uh you're not quite as happy so how do
we uh get that message out that again we
want things to flow smooth and safe and
uh uh also The Pedestrian Crossings are
a key component of redeveloping
uh the whole traffic pattern but that
has the effect of slowing down vehicle
traffic when you're doing greater time
for pedestrian
Crossings and I think you also had a
really good point earlier where it's not
as simple as just putting in a
correction because there's a a reaction
or the Rippling effect also so were
there any other questions or
comments right so I'm going to re have
this on the agenda for another two weeks
all right next item on the agenda is the
nomination of Mr Keith St John to the
civilian police review board and that'll
be discussed by Miss Patrick thank you
um so we had all received an email from
the chair of the civilian police review
board city council has the opportunity
to have someone serve on the civilian
police review board and that seat has
been vacant since March of uh
2023 um Mr St John's bio and resin was
shared with you he is an attorney he has
an extensive legal background as well as
um background in governmental Affairs um
he's also been very active in our city
um both in The Stockade neighborhood and
now um he lives he uh where he resides
now as well in terms of um his his
involvement in that neighborhood
association as well um so he has
expressed interest in the um in the seat
um and I just think he's a he's an
excellent candidate primarily because of
his legal background so I wanted to
bring him forward for
discussion uh I would say um seeing no
other applicants I think it's important
to make sure the Fe re board can have
quorums that they can discuss the
complaints that they're seeing and I
think anytime you find a volunteer
that's willing and able to provide their
time and energy towards these types of
efforts is uh important um so any other
questions or comments um no I'm fine
with this uh this um candidate I just
want to remind people that we had we
said in our legislation that we will
have a uh plus an alternate so we still
have a person that we could um and I
know there were a couple people that
they haven't submitt the resume that
have said they were interested in being
an alternate so I just want to remind
you that we also need an alternate for
this position and um it's equally
important that as Mr Williams has said
that um we make sure we have enough
people um there's a person who just had
to leave the board because of their
employment so want to make sure that
they have the opportunity to um to make
sure they had to cancel their last
meeting as a result of that so so want
to make sure that we get enough people
on the board so they can hold a
meeting does anybody have any questions
or Ive this second second oh oh I can
second sorry
no the board is down uh and you want
this to move uh quickly as opposed to
waiting we have a an off Monday too so
it's not two weeks some of these things
become three weeks if this is the
consensus from the council I'll do a
letter to you
tomorrow the process is has come to me
then I send it back to the council and
you confirm it uh that I'd send the
letter to you so that you could act on
it in the affirmative on basis for the
following Monday and actually make the
appointment you know effective that day
or you know whenever the clerk sends it
over me the next day and we sign it if
you want that or if you want it held
just to go
the two cycles down on the
road my opinion is that we don't hold it
just because as I uh just said that we
they just had to cancel a meeting
because they didn't have a quum so if we
can get as many people on board to make
sure that they have a qu are able to
meet I think it's very
important I'll send a letter to you
tomorrow that can be incorporated P for
next
mon
perfect no
objections no no
objection okay so are there any other
items that call before the Public Safety
Committee hearing can
I those in favor hi hi any other items
of Public Safety Committee uh can I a
motion for so second in
favor thank you um I'd like to call the
order City development and planning we
have three items on the agenda the first
one was arpa contract updates but I
don't see Miss Carver here tonight so
I'm not
sure uh
exactly how that happened so I'll just
have to give her a call tomorrow and we
can have a discussion and make sure that
it's on for the next time um item number
two excuse me could we if we could get
the um spreadsheet updated when she
comes spre you know as we were doing
before sure rather than just sort of
furiously writing okay thanks I make
sure okay the next item um is amending
section 24818 of the city code to
designate J Street from Liberty Street
to Union Street a two-way street there
was a public hearing on October
10th we had no speakers
so at this point in time I would need a
motion to move that forward so move
second all in favor thank you and item
number three reminder presentation of
the hearts Family Cleaners CR and
1023 Mr T yes uh s family will be
present next Monday presid resolution
okay thank you no actions taken we just
want to remind you thank you there's no
other business to come before City
development planning I'll ask for motion
to adjourn so Mo second all in favor
we're adjourn thank you next item on the
agenda is the claims committee so I'd
like to open claims um we have one item
on the agenda Miguel Pama versus the
city of SKC and we need to um go into
executive session for that so i' like a
motion for executive session so and a
second okay all in favor I okay we're in
second session the public
have