7:00 p.m.Watch Live
Agenda & full city packet
Approve Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Professional Service Contract With The Following Firm For The Following Services (RFP 11-10) Government Services) – Public Works and Parks & Recreation: Lowe Engineers I have a request in for all city contracts over $50,000 to be posted to the web.
Approval of Contract for Local Maintenance and Improvement Grant.
FIRST READ and PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance to Amend the 2011 Operating and Capital Budgets.
$3.7 million in surplus host funds divvied up as follows, $1.5 Million to DPD Vehicle Replacement Fund (savings for future expense down the road several years), $1.1 Million to Fund Transportation Enhancement Grant for Dunwoody Village Pkwy (savings for future expense), additional $600 K on top of the 2012 budget shown below for Paving, additional $500 K on top of the 2012 budget shown below for Sidewalks.FIRST READ: Budget Ordinance for the Year Ending December 31, 2012. Draft 2012 Budget
FIRST READ: Ordinance to Amend Chapter 27 Regarding Provisions Regarding StreetFrontage as They Relate to Lot Widths.
FIRST READ: Ordinance to Amend the City of Dunwoody Zoning Classification Map forZoning Conditions of Land Lot 347, District 18 in Consideration of Zoning Case RZ 11-091 (9 Ravinia Drive).
Resolution to Amend City of Dunwoody Purchasing Policy to Add Appraisal Requirement for Real Estate Acquisition. I have a request in to modify policy that all contracts over $50,000 be posted to the web for the life of the contract and then I want to review the amount of changes allowed in these contracts as I believe the current verbiage is too flexible.
Discussion of Dunwoody Village Ice Skating Attraction.(Told it is artificial ice?)
4 comments:
John: An almost unnoticed and potentially costly item has been added to the Dunwoody ballot in addition to the Parks Referendum. The City Manager has asked for the authority to pass Tax Allocation Districts (TAD's)and little or no information has been given to the public about the pro's and con's of this measure.
In a nutshell, the City Manager and the Council are trying to "backstop" the Parks bill should it fail by trying to create another funding source for acquisition of property and redevelopment.
The TAD is nothing more than an alternative to revenue bonds, betting that the enhancements to properties made with TAD-bonds will generate sufficient incremental tax revenue to offset the cost of the bonds.
This is a very "non-transparent" and, to my mind, deceptive program that the City Manager hopes will fly under-the-radar.
Council should certainly take the responsibility for discussing and explaining this program prior to the vote on November 8th.
I thought that TADs weren't bonds but property tax abatement in the development area.
Anon 4:10:
The language of the Referendum items says, essentially, that Dunwoody may follow the redevelopment procedures of the Georgia law, as amended from time-to-time.
Certainly, tax-abatements in the developing area are possible, but so are the issuance of tax-exempt bonds, and tax-revenue based bonds, if the City holds the paper for doing the development.
This question is enormously more complicated than the City Manager made it out at the DHA meeting last weekend, and it's fraught with potential abuse and long-term debt.
I'm pointing out that this item got put on the ballot, and almost no one knows about it outside the "inner circle" of City Manager and Council. I'm still trying to find when it was discussed at the Council meeting and what was said.
It certainly has not garnered the attention the parks bonds referendum items have, and given the rather vague language and lack of specific intent, it looks (to all intents and purposes) to be a matter of "legal housekeeping".
I contend that it is potentially much more than that and a vehicle for City of Dunwoody to engage in redevelopment activities with tax payer monies and at tax-payer risks without proper oversight and control.
Certainly, we can expect the City Council, Mayor, and City Manager to provide substantially more information than has been forthcoming.
Please help Georgia agriculture and the state's economy by repealing Georgia House Bill 87.
Post a Comment