The Monday night City Council vote on the “cum cap” (Cumulative Capital Development Fund) was not particularly important. Setting the CCD rate has been a kind of financial kabuki for 25 years. The city (usually) picks the highest possible rate. The state cuts the rate, factors it against assessment, and gives the city a dollar number. Then you re-roof the park’s barn with “cum cap” money instead of precious general fund dollars that can then be used for salaries or paper clips or bullets or gasoline. The conventional financial wisdom, and the reason for the Clerk Treasurer’s proposal, is that you take whatever you can get from the state while you can because next time you may get less.
Ann Hunt (District #3) and I thought it was too soon in the chaotic 2010 budget process to throw away $60,000. (This is nothing like the $600,000 Excessive Levy (Res.22-08) the Republican Administration asked for last November.) We lost. So it goes.
More interesting was Danny Weiss’s remarks later in the evening and the Mayor’s response. The CHAUNC PAC leader (his neighborhood straddles Districts #2 and #3) commented that lots of folk wouldn’t mind a tax increase for a good cause. Mayor Dennis suggested he make a contribution to the Park Fund.
Which means, I suppose, that instead of a tax increase in support of the West Lafayette schools, we should all make a contribution to the West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation. Which means, I suppose, that should it come to a “revenue enhancement” for the schools, the school board will depend on rescue from the voters in two Democratic districts it has regularly dismissed (remember Sarah Mustillo; scroll down for that entry 8/11/08) and whose issues it has consistently ignored and where “SOS” yard signs are currently very, very rare. Districts where people wouldn’t mind a tax increase for a good cause.
I believe that if it is legal, and if the Department of Local Government Finance can be cajoled into going along with the plan, the School Board could win that tax vote. There are about 30,000 people in West Lafayette, about 10,000 are registered to vote, and about 4,500 voted in the last municipal election. There are 2000 children in our schools. If the parents vote, you win a May 2010 vote!
Progressives are not much troubled by that idea. True conservatives should lobby folks to vote against it on ideological grounds . . . and then write a check to the School Foundation.
Or the Park Fund.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
APC Land Use Plan Request
I have asked that the resolution (and map - at right) be included on the agenda of the May 4th. West Lafayette City Council meeting. Originally suggested by Danny Weiss, and petitioned for in an email from Carl Griffin on behalf of the New Chauncey Neighborhood Association dated 26 March, it asks the Area Plan Commission to examine the current land use plan for the New Chauncey Neighborhood.
The resolution itself copies one which was originally drafted by Perry Brown (D) and approved by Dave Heath (R) which dealt with the Historic Jeff Neighborhood. Either Sallie Fahey or Carl Griffin (the West Lafayette City Council APC rep) will speak to the work the APC and neighborhoods can do together at the May 4th. meeting. New Chauncey will select liaisons to the study group in due course.
The City of West Lafayette last made provision for the development of a New Chauncey Neighborhood Plan through a contract approved on 11/17/1998 with Ratio Planning. The last Strategic Plan Update for the City of West Lafayette was completed in June 2005. People new to the neighborhood need to learn zoning basics (e.g. R- 1 vs. R-1U) . Given the peculiar character of this neighborhood, planning cannot be neglected. . . . and this is free :)
The resolution itself copies one which was originally drafted by Perry Brown (D) and approved by Dave Heath (R) which dealt with the Historic Jeff Neighborhood. Either Sallie Fahey or Carl Griffin (the West Lafayette City Council APC rep) will speak to the work the APC and neighborhoods can do together at the May 4th. meeting. New Chauncey will select liaisons to the study group in due course.
The City of West Lafayette last made provision for the development of a New Chauncey Neighborhood Plan through a contract approved on 11/17/1998 with Ratio Planning. The last Strategic Plan Update for the City of West Lafayette was completed in June 2005. People new to the neighborhood need to learn zoning basics (e.g. R- 1 vs. R-1U) . Given the peculiar character of this neighborhood, planning cannot be neglected. . . . and this is free :)
J&C "Greater Lafayette Blogger"
Greater Lafayette Blogger: Peter Bunder
The article in the paper has a photo of me in an Irish linen hat. I think it makes me look dapper :)
The article in the paper has a photo of me in an Irish linen hat. I think it makes me look dapper :)
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Ordinance #03-09
Ordinance #03-09 passed on first reading. J&C 4/7/09
Exponent 4/7/09
Many thanks to everyone for your help in getting Ordinance #03-09 passed on first reading!
We will need SOMEONE ( or two :) ) to show up at the April 9th 3:00 pm public meeting at City Hall to discuss what comes next. If only to monitor the room . . . I would hope this meeting would provide for a schedule of public meetings on the issue in a variety of locations over the next few weeks.
I will continue to argue (a) the current law is enforceable; at question is the will of the current administration to use the existing ordinance. (b) if the city will proceed only if the law is made less vague, we have provided some detail in #03-09.
Even if we prevail legislatively, I would be willing to bet a $100 donation to Mayor Dennis's favorite charity that there will be no successful prosecution under this or any remodeled ordinance in the next 2 1/2 years. We cannot force the city administration to prosecute anybody for anything, no matter how regular or egregious the violations. Yet by proceeding, we continue to defend the value of our multi-class, multi-generational, near campus neighborhood - a natural resource as valuable to this university community as a lake or mountain (well; almost :) ).
Exponent 4/7/09
Many thanks to everyone for your help in getting Ordinance #03-09 passed on first reading!
We will need SOMEONE ( or two :) ) to show up at the April 9th 3:00 pm public meeting at City Hall to discuss what comes next. If only to monitor the room . . . I would hope this meeting would provide for a schedule of public meetings on the issue in a variety of locations over the next few weeks.
I will continue to argue (a) the current law is enforceable; at question is the will of the current administration to use the existing ordinance. (b) if the city will proceed only if the law is made less vague, we have provided some detail in #03-09.
Even if we prevail legislatively, I would be willing to bet a $100 donation to Mayor Dennis's favorite charity that there will be no successful prosecution under this or any remodeled ordinance in the next 2 1/2 years. We cannot force the city administration to prosecute anybody for anything, no matter how regular or egregious the violations. Yet by proceeding, we continue to defend the value of our multi-class, multi-generational, near campus neighborhood - a natural resource as valuable to this university community as a lake or mountain (well; almost :) ).
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Over-Occupancy Ordinance #03-09
As the city's ad-hoc committee on over-occupancy code revision has not met in nearly two months, West Lafayette Democrats have decided to begin the long fight to clarify and strengthen and so (hopefully) improve enforcement of the city's over-occupancy code.
(Proposed Ordinance #03-09 - At right and down.)
We have added security deposit reporting (My thanks to Paul Roales!)
We have tried to remove any ambiguity regarding the commercial rental firms monitoring obligations.
Things NOT covered:
- frequency of occupancy inspections
-"cousins" in current code vs. IRS definition
- public access to inspection reports
Also, please find to the right a fascinating approach to the issue of rental zoning from East Lansing; the "Residential Rental Restriction Overlay".
Perhaps the most important question is this, "Does the City Administration have the will to enforce either current or future revisions to the occupancy code?"
(Proposed Ordinance #03-09 - At right and down.)
We have added security deposit reporting (My thanks to Paul Roales!)
We have tried to remove any ambiguity regarding the commercial rental firms monitoring obligations.
Things NOT covered:
- frequency of occupancy inspections
-"cousins" in current code vs. IRS definition
- public access to inspection reports
Also, please find to the right a fascinating approach to the issue of rental zoning from East Lansing; the "Residential Rental Restriction Overlay".
Perhaps the most important question is this, "Does the City Administration have the will to enforce either current or future revisions to the occupancy code?"
Friday, March 13, 2009
Weidas Pay
Just in case you missed the very small article in today's paper.
http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009903130340
They are still "chasing the tenants" . . .
http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009903130340
They are still "chasing the tenants" . . .
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Republican Administration Cuts Low-Income Housing Funds
My comments (more or less) to the CDBG hearing 3/12 . . .
The West Lafayette City Administration cut its 2009 -10 allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds to New Chauncey Housing Incorporated from $110,000 last year to $50,000. These funds are the only monies that can used to repair the homes of low and moderate income people, particularly the elderly, or to acquire and rehab properties, (for example, a home recently purchased on Salisbury St. near the Happy Hollow School) outside of the HUD target area served by New Chauncey Housing.
Let me make five points:
1) The City decided to allocate $15,000 to beautify “Gumball Alley” (sic) on State St. in the Chauncey Village area. That’s fine. Beautifying an alley may be an oxymoron, but it’s a good idea. Unfortunately, the administration (The funds are allocated at the Mayor’s discretion after consultation with an advisory board.) has decided to do that with funds that could have been used to fix your grandmother’s roof.
2) I understand that city bureaucracies are strengthened when funds are placed under the control of a particular city office. So funding the Energy Assistance Program ($15,000) through the Development Office makes some sense as a political decision. New Chauncey Housing, however, already buys furnaces and windows for low-income persons. It does so much more cheaply than the city. NCHI’s employees receive no benefits. Generally, outsourcing to cheaper sub-contractors for social services has been the goal of the Republican Governor. Republicans take note.
3) This administration has remarked that it would like to see New Chauncey Housing work outside of the HUD target zone. This is obviously not possible at this funding level.
4) Perhaps the administration presumes that New Chauncey Housing would be both able and willing to spend “HOME” Funds outside of the New Chauncey Neighborhood. (HOME funds represent the largest Federal block grant for state and local governments. Its purpose is to create affordable housing for low-income families and individuals. They are distributed to CHODOS (Community HOusing Development OrganizationS). CHODOS are glued to specific maps.) Many restrictions accompany HOME monies. They are administered NOT by the City of West Lafayette but by a jurisdictional consortium led by the City of Lafayette. To spend these funds outside of the New Chauncey Neighborhood might violate both the regulations governing the funds and the corporate charter of New Chauncey Housing Inc.
5) If it were possible to spend HOME funds outside of our neighborhood, it would make more sense for the NCHI Board to spend those funds in Lafayette. Housing is cheaper there. Given current funding patterns, the most important man in the life of New Chauncey Housing is not John Dennis, but Tony Roswarski. The most important woman in their life is not Judy Rhodes, but Aimee Jacobsen.
The city is moving away from a public/non-profit partnership in low-income housing that was 12 years in the making. This Republican administration is cutting low-income housing funds.
The West Lafayette City Administration cut its 2009 -10 allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds to New Chauncey Housing Incorporated from $110,000 last year to $50,000. These funds are the only monies that can used to repair the homes of low and moderate income people, particularly the elderly, or to acquire and rehab properties, (for example, a home recently purchased on Salisbury St. near the Happy Hollow School) outside of the HUD target area served by New Chauncey Housing.
Let me make five points:
1) The City decided to allocate $15,000 to beautify “Gumball Alley” (sic) on State St. in the Chauncey Village area. That’s fine. Beautifying an alley may be an oxymoron, but it’s a good idea. Unfortunately, the administration (The funds are allocated at the Mayor’s discretion after consultation with an advisory board.) has decided to do that with funds that could have been used to fix your grandmother’s roof.
2) I understand that city bureaucracies are strengthened when funds are placed under the control of a particular city office. So funding the Energy Assistance Program ($15,000) through the Development Office makes some sense as a political decision. New Chauncey Housing, however, already buys furnaces and windows for low-income persons. It does so much more cheaply than the city. NCHI’s employees receive no benefits. Generally, outsourcing to cheaper sub-contractors for social services has been the goal of the Republican Governor. Republicans take note.
3) This administration has remarked that it would like to see New Chauncey Housing work outside of the HUD target zone. This is obviously not possible at this funding level.
4) Perhaps the administration presumes that New Chauncey Housing would be both able and willing to spend “HOME” Funds outside of the New Chauncey Neighborhood. (HOME funds represent the largest Federal block grant for state and local governments. Its purpose is to create affordable housing for low-income families and individuals. They are distributed to CHODOS (Community HOusing Development OrganizationS). CHODOS are glued to specific maps.) Many restrictions accompany HOME monies. They are administered NOT by the City of West Lafayette but by a jurisdictional consortium led by the City of Lafayette. To spend these funds outside of the New Chauncey Neighborhood might violate both the regulations governing the funds and the corporate charter of New Chauncey Housing Inc.
5) If it were possible to spend HOME funds outside of our neighborhood, it would make more sense for the NCHI Board to spend those funds in Lafayette. Housing is cheaper there. Given current funding patterns, the most important man in the life of New Chauncey Housing is not John Dennis, but Tony Roswarski. The most important woman in their life is not Judy Rhodes, but Aimee Jacobsen.
It might be argued that New Chauncey’s cash balance argues against such financial aid. The current state of the housing and lending markets aside, I would be happy to use that argument in any discussion of city finances. Using a cash balance accounting, the city shows a surplus of between one-half and three-quarters of a million dollars. Time for a tax cut. No need to revisit the excessive levy tax.
The city is moving away from a public/non-profit partnership in low-income housing that was 12 years in the making. This Republican administration is cutting low-income housing funds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
