OCR Text |
Show THE ZEPHYRAPRIL 89 Tom: We have no Intention of going In and taking someones property for aiding another Individual and starting a business for profit The purpose is to encourage someone to spend their money In Moab to do some real estate development, and we In turn will take the tax Increment the increase In taxes on that development after its built; the City Council will make the determination on its use. Zephyr: Some people are concerned because their residential property have been Included In these blighted areas as designated bv the Redevelopment Agency. Tom: First, the City has not designated any study area that has a residence on it. There may be study areas In the future with residences on it However, owners of residences and the City can enter into an agreement that would allow them to rest assured that their home will not be taken or used in that study area. A business can also be exempted. Zephyr: What will this Redevelopment Agency cost the taxpayers? Tom: The entities that have taxes to be derived from the Improvement will not receive those funds until a period of time has passed. Its a little complicated. The first 5 years after its been designated a study area, the tax Increment goes to the agency. If the money is shortcutted from going to the County, then the County wouldnt have those funds for something else. So that may cost the taxpayers an Increment of money to offset that cost. However, all money collected from a study area must be spent on improvements within that area. This City Council has already voiced the opinion that if there is any money shortcutted from the school system, they want to spend at least an equal amount out of that tax increment money that wouldve normally gone to the school district with the consideration of the School Boards input on school property. Zephyr: Last question. A couple of weeks aao. the City Council revised the fee schedule for the Golf Course. A membership at the dub Increased from $250 to $350. In addition, after 50 rounds, members would pay $4 for each additional 18 holes. The next week the Council revised that proposal and dropped the add-- on fees. Some people others thought it was grossly thought the Increases were unfair. Can vou explain the increases, and then the decision to reverse or modify them? Tom: You want me to be succinct, and that is a very encompassing problem. There should be more communication between the people running the golf course and the Council, and these things ought to be worked out ahead of time; rather than to come to an adverse relationthe development of the ship. Were all working for the same thing who use for the services. reasonable fees those community, Iona-overd- ue: PAGE 7 We believe that when someone can play 250 rounds of golf for $175; that works out to 70 cents a game. Thats an unreasonable use of the services for the money paid. On the other hand, do we put a tab on the other end of It that makes it come out to $1300 year? That Is an extremely large Increase. The problem Is, we went after grant money to the tune of $1,242,000, which includes $750,000 for the 9 hole addition, $220,000 for the water line to cut down on the pumping costs for the golf course. Then I see they budgeted $12,000 to pump the water at the golf course. The water Is costing $9,500 that they just spent When the Golf Course Board comes in and shows theyre deficit budgeting $56,000, I feel the Council was prudent In saving raise vour fees. The Board has to be prudent In the management of that course themselves; they know whos getting the services that arent being paid for. All these years thereve been people playing for a dollar a round -they havent been paying their way. Its time that the Board took the reins, raised the fees, and went out and got additional fees for trail fees, use of the golf carts, and charge those people whove been getting those services for a very nominal amount The Board did come back and showed they do intend to generate more revenue than the initial budget showing the $56,000 loss. I think for 1989 they had $43,000 in the bank. They can use that money up; they dont need to come to the County and the City, if theyre going to budget a deficit, they should stand that cost. Next year theyll miss the fees to cover it. Then I think thats prudent action. As long as the Board and the Council agree that they will take care of the costs and not hit the City up for additional funding, then I think its up to them to set that fee. If they want to let people play for a dollar a round when it gets up to 250 rounds, thats up to them. But they take it out of their pocket, not the City and County coffers. Im a County taxpayer as well, and Im offended that they would ask for thirty, and be budgeted for $25,000. I dont think they had the right to ask for that money in 1989. At the last meeting, it was decided that if the Board wants to cut back the fees that the Council recommended, then the City felt the Board should take the full responsibility on their shoulders for the Golf Course operation. The City will not budget any funds in 1989. As long as that happens, Im pleased with that. And I feel the County Commission should do the same. They budgeted $25,000 anyway, which I totally disagree with. I hope the new Commission will take a look at a number of things that the lame-du- ck Commission budgeted last December. Mr. Thanks. Mayor. Zephyr: - Energy Bldg. E. Center St. Moab, Utah (801) 259-884- 7 Whs MMIES VIDEO LIBRARY Open 7 Days a Week La Hacienda 9 574 No. Main Jeff Davis, owner Open 6 AM to 10 PM 7 days a week 259-631- SPECIAL! Fri. and Sat: half marathon weekend ALL YOU CAN EAT: pancakes - AM gourmet spaghetti - PM You find great Westerns at the Movies. |