11/19/2013 Minutes CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, NEBRASKA
MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
November 19, 2013
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a Study Session of the City Council of the City of Grand
Island, Nebraska was conducted in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 100 East First Street, on
November 19, 2013. Notice of the meeting was given in the Grand Island Independent on
November 13, 2013.
Mayor Jay Vavricek called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following Councilmembers
were present: Vaughn Minton, Mike Paulick, John Gericke, Peg Gilbert, Mitch Nickerson, Julie
Hehnke, Chuck Haase, and Linna Dee Donaldson. Councilmember Robert Niemann was absent.
The following City Officials were present: City Administrator Mary Lou Brown, City Clerk
RaNae Edwards, City Attorney Robert Sivick, City Treasurer and Finance Director Jaye Monter,
and City Engineer and Public Works Director John Collins.
INVOCATION was given by Community Youth Council member Regan Dimmitt followed by
the PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
Mayor Vavricek introduced Community Youth Council member Regan Dimmitt and board
member Randy See.
SPECIAL ITEMS:
Discussion on Street Assessment Methodology. Public Works Director John Collins reported that
the City's policy and practice had been to assess adjacent property owners for the cost of street
and drainage improvements. He stated the method of assessing had been in place for several
decades and had changed very little. Some steps were defined by law and could not be changed,
others were somewhat flexible. A PowerPoint presentation was given explaining the street
assessment methodology.
Reviewed were sections of state statutes relative to assessments. The following steps were
reviewed regarding the process of creating an assessment district:
1. Petition from adjacent property owners requesting improvement(s) submitted to Public
Works
2. Ordinance from Council creating district
3. Ordinance published ¬ification mailed directly to affected property owners
4. If owners representing more than 50% of the property protest, during the 30 day protest
period, the district is not continued
5. Otherwise the Council may continue the district
6. Design of the improvement(s)begins
7. Final payment made after construction is completed
8. Assessment distribution is calculated
Page 2,City Council Study Session,November 19,2013
9. Notice of the assessment is published once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in advance of
the Council meeting
10. Total cost and recommended assessments are presented to the Board of Equalization (i.e.
Council) for approval
11. Assessments are collected
Comments were made concerning the assessments figured on linear feet. Mr. Sivick answered
questions regarding who could create an assessment district. Council could create a district as
well as property owners by petition.
The following assessment factors were presented:
Frontage—linear feet of property adjacent to the road
Depth — used in areas where the depth of property is inconsistent and some is less than
300 feet deep
Frontage equivalency — used for properties on corners with very large or very small
frontage relative to their total area
Note - at times the City has assessed only 37' and paid for any additional width; and has
done the same for drainage over 30"
Discussion was held regarding the width of streets. Depth of lots when assessing property was
discussed.
The following potential changes were presented:
• Calculating the percentage of cost allocation when the district is created rather than after
the project is complete
• Changing or eliminating the depth portion of the calculation
• Differentiating assessment methodology with property type
• Reducing or eliminating assessments for collectors and above
Mr. Collins stated that if the City allocated costs as soon as possible the percentage of the cost
allocated to each property would be known when the district was created. Substantial work
would be performed that would not be necessary if the district did not move forward and the size
of the district may change, nullifying the calculations.
The depth factor was added at a time when city blocks of around 300' were the norm. Mall and
large stores were not usually in the first 300'. Commercial value was derived from access to the
road and visibility from the road. Residential property had greater value from access to the road,
but more access did not increase value.
Comments were made concerning using an impact fee for commercial properties. Discussion
was held regarding funding of projects and knowing the costs up front. Mr. Collins explained the
process for property protests.
Industrial and commercial property gained value from road access, often increasing in value with
more access, whereas commercial property gained value with visibility. Residential property had
Page 3,City Council Study Session,November 19,2013
— greater value from access to the road, but more access does not increase value. Land use
changes, value were added only to the raw property.
Mr. Collins explained the difference between industrial and commercial properties. All
properties were currently assessed. Collector and arterial roads were explained. Mr. Collins
stated his intent was to put together an official manual and post it to the web.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m.
Pon. aca LOCkfl g .,
RaNae Edwards
City Clerk