Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 5, 2024 Council Minutes COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA August 5, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes The Common Council of the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana met for the Regular Meeting on August 5, 2024. Council President White along with City Clerk Gill called the meeting to order at 6:01p.m. The meeting was open to the public in person as well as live streamed via the City Website using Zoom. INVOCATION: Led by Father Adam Ahern, Sacred Heart Catholic Church Pledge of Allegiance: ROLL CALL: The roll call was conducted by City Clerk Lisa Gill and present in Council Chambers were Councilperson Burns, Councilperson Semones, Councilperson Reed, Council President White, Councilperson Webb, Council Vice President Hawkins, Councilperson Snelling and Councilperson Stoner. Councilperson Anderson was absent. Let the record reflect that 8 Council Members were present in Council Chambers and 1 absent. APROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilperson Burns made a motion to approve the Minutes for July 15, 2024, seconded by Councilperson Webb; motion passed, 8-0. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA: Councilperson Stoner asked if number 9 and number 11 would be condensed into one. Council President White advised that they would leave it as is and work through it. Councilperson Burns asked if they needed to amend the agenda to add 1si and Council President White advised they did. Councilperson Burns made a motion to amend the Agenda to add the Tax Abatement and Councilperson Reed seconded the motion. Council President White stated it would be first under new business; motion passed, 8-0. Councilperson Burns made a motion to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Council Vice President Hawkins; motion passed, 8-0. CLAIMS TO APPROVE: Civil City$3,739,290.55 Council President White advised the Civil City Claims were in the amount of$3,739,290.55. Mrs. Metcalf advised there were no changes. Councilperson Webb made a motion to approve the Civil City Claims, seconded by Councilperson Reed; motion passed, 8-0. Parks$202,892.97 Council President White advised the Parks Claims were in the amount of$202,892.97. Mrs. Metcalf advised there were no changes. Councilperson Semones made a motion to approve the Parks Claims, seconded by Councilperson Burns; motion passed, 8-0. REPORT OF THE CLERK: Clerk Gill advised the next Budget Workshop will be on Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 5:30 pm in Council Chambers. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Short-Term Rental Discussion Council President White advised this was tabled on July 1, 2024 and on July 15, 2024. Council President White moved to have it taken off the table, seconded by Councilperson Stoner; motion passed, 8-0. Council President White advised since this is off the table it would be discussed under New Business when the Ordinance was discussed. 2. Heather Metcalf 2024-OR-36(Public Hearing) Ordinance of Additional Appropriation Mrs. Metcalf advised there were no changes since the last meeting. Council President White opened the Public Hearing at 6:08 pm, there were no members of the community present to speak for or against the matter. Council President White closed the Public Hearing at 6:08 pm. Councilperson Semones made a motion to approve 2024-OR-36 on the Third and Final Reading, seconded by Councilperson Stoner; motion passed, 8-0. NEW BUSINESS: 1. 2024-R-10 Tax Abatement Request for Real and Personal Property Located at 125 North Access Road. City Attorney Les Merkley advised the Council should have a copy of a Resolution in regards to a Tax Abatement request for Real and Personal Property for Roll Forming Corporation (RFC). The request was for a six (6) year abatement on real and personal property and ten (10) year abatement on improvements to Real Estate. This abatement does come with a favorable recommendation from the Redevelopment Commission. There is a statement of benefits and how this project stacks up with the requirements for abatements scored very well. John Launius, Vice President, Director of Economic Development with 1si advised RFC is looking to make a significant expansion at their Jeffersonville location as a supplier of rolled form metal. If chosen, the expansion would result in a new production line for heat treated frame rails and serve several major global customers. It would also include $77.9 million in construction equipment and other related services as well as 110 new employees at an average wage of$35.52 an hour, compared to the Clark County average wage of$24.44 an hour. As part of the decision making process, the company is requesting support from the City. Their final determination will be made on August 19, 2024. George Ott, Port Director was present to show his support as well as Mike Moles, Financial Advisor. Brad Lacy, Chief Financial Officer for Roll Forming Corporation presented the Council with a presentation about their company and explained each page (see attached). They are a subsidiary of Voestalpine AG which is a publicly traded company in Austria. They are a global leader in manufacturing processing and developing of metal products, primarily around steel and technologies around steel. They are on five (5) different continents with 500 group companies with RFC being one of the 500 and they have over 51,000 employees. It is about an $18 billion dollar company. The company breaks down into different divisions such as automotive, precision strip and warehouse. They are part of a $4 Billion dollar division metal forming company. They currently have seven (7) production facilities, with the latest one being built a few months ago. Currently they have most of their footprint in Shelbyville, Kentucky, where the main headquarters remain. They also have a production facility in Pennsylvania, they are the oldest manufacturing company in Shelby County. In 2000 they were acquired by Voestalpine and in 2001, they began their partnership here in Indiana. They have a tremendous focus on their mission and values. They have a continuous improvement culture that is what they are looking to bring here. As they look at manufacturing opportunities and bringing technology, skill and talent to the area, they will be an advocate in support of those things. They are a company that invest in their employees and community. Family oriented company. They were 2023 Manufacturer of the Year in Kentucky. They will be expanding in one of two locations, Indiana or Pennsylvania. An overview about the project itself, there will be somewhere in the order of 150,000 square foot facility, $78 million dollar investment along with 110 jobs which will exceed the overall wages of the county. Council President White asked where the headquarters is located. Mr. Lacy advised in Austria. Councilperson Reed asked what the environmental impact would be on any of the cities that will be chosen for expansion. Mr. Lacy advised he knows that aluminum and metal manufacturing can have an environmental impact, however they have a budding and growing sustainability program geared toward ensuring that their footprint on the carbon emission and evaluating how they can not only quantify it, but also reduce it. For example,Voestalpine has an initiative to go green and actually have green producing steel. This is over in Europe but it's an initiative corporate wide. Council President White asked what the Council could do to convince them to expand here rather than Pennsylvania. Mr. Lacy advised, this was an opportunity that will be evaluated strongly and they are excited about the potential of expanding in Indiana. Councilperson Webb thanked Mr. Lacy for their investment and commitment to Jeffersonville. Council Vice President Hawkins advised this comes with a unanimous recommendation from the Redevelopment. There is a formula of and the applicant has to score so many points. This company was off the chart with points. He would highly recommend moving forward with the tax abatement. Councilperson Reed advised that she appreciated the feedback and perspective that Mr. Lacy gave. A tax abatement is a serious matter. Resident pay their taxes, so when they see companies getting tax abatements for a certain amount of time, it creates a negative impact and understanding how that would offset the cost of other things within our community is important to bring to the forefront. Knowing that RFC did score off the charts gives a really positive perspective. Councilperson Stoner asked Mr. Launius to elaborate on the misconceptions of Tax Abatements. Mr. Launius advised with the way Indiana positions to support projects was kind of a national best practice. Most of the tools that they use, including the one that they used tonight, would be considered performance based. He thinks there is a misunderstanding sometimes of how tax incentives and these types of support are utilized. In order for the company to reap those credits or the reduced tax burden, they have to actually spend money and bring taxable capital. One clarification is companies like RFC go in paying taxes on day one. When they partner with the state of Indiana, the Indiana Economic Development Corporation's support, which they have already pledged their support, is also contingent upon some local degree of support. That would be a protective measure to make sure the state was in coordination with the local. There are multiple kind of levels, assessment and support that go into these projects. Councilperson Stoner asked if the 10% annual fee described in the Indiana Code just for the six (6) year abatement and for the (10) year abatement or would it be just one single one. Mr. Launius advised it is for both, but would find out for certain. Councilperson Stoner advised that the Council has an economic Abatement Fund that doesn't get touched, at least up until now and suggested the Council could go forth and do some positive projects in the City in areas that haven't maybe seen that investment. Mr. Lacy advised their decision will be made the week of August 12, 2024 and they will communicate it shortly thereafter. This goes to show how quickly they are preparing to move forward, one way or another. Their Communication Media Relations person, Kim Bentley could not be at the meeting, Mr. Lacy has her contact information if anyone would like to contact her. Mr. Lacy advised as they look to further develop new markets and grow their business to meet customer's needs, they would like to thank the IEDC, Duke Energy, Indiana Clark County, 1si Jeffersonville, Redevelopment Commission with City of Jeffersonville for the support and evaluating where the next chapter of growth will reside for Voestalpine and RFC. The cooperation with state and local leaders has been a key consideration for their company, however they still have a decision to make on the ideal location for their investment for their stockholders, employees, customers and the communities they serve. Final decision will be made on August 12, 2024 and they will communicate it the week of August 19, 2024. If anyone has any question, please contact Kim Bentley. Council Vice President Hawkins made a motion to approve 2024-R-10, seconded by Councilperson Webb; motion passed, 8-0. 2. 2024-OR-37 Ordinance Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Non-Owner Occupied Short- Term Rental Property Council President White advised there were several residents signed up to speak. 1. Pauletta Feldman advised she and several of the neighbors have concerns regarding the short-term rentals, they are not against them, however they are against the unfettered development of short-term rentals in their neighborhood, it changes the character of them. They are asking that the city to undertake oversight on this process, do develop a permitting process so the city knows what is going on, that would benefit both neighborhoods and investors. She feels there will end up being empty short-term rentals and hotel rooms and taking up property that families are trying buy. 2. Cheryl Lamp owner/co-owner of short-term rental at 938 E Maple Street advised she and her daughter invested in Jeffersonville after much research and like the redevelopment plan. They not only are involved in Jeffersonville, but promote the other businesses. She also feels that the moratorium was being rushed. She found out about it on social media, did not see it advertised in the paper or on the City of Jeffersonville website. When she started the short-term rental, she could not find out how or where to register it. She feels a committee of different stakeholders would be best, not just the residents that live on the same street as the short-term rental. She has never had any problems or complaints, anyone that has stayed on their property has their contact information. 3. Chelsea Hollingsworth owner/co-owner of short-term rental at 938 E Maple Street advised She had looked back at the previous meeting that she was unable to attend and sensed an urgency to pass the moratorium, thank you for not passing it. She feels that residents, business owners and restaurant owners should have a say. She could not find any information on the moratorium until she came to the meeting. Council President White advised that it was just advertised last Thursday. She advised that Jeffersonville is doing a lot of stuff to draw tourism, but then it's like come for the day, but don't spend the night. She feels by having more short-term rentals that would help support small business owners. Councilperson Stoner asked if she thought other short-term owners are as responsible as her and her mother are. Ms. Hollingsworth advised, yes, largely because it's a really hard market and a lot of people get on websites and view different properties, people decide after looking at the first 5-6 pictures and determine if they want to stay there or not. You can drive by and see where short-term rentals are most of the time by how meticulously they are maintained. Councilperson Stoner advised that you mother said that you all wanted to open another short-term rental, are you all considering rapid expansion with more short-term rentals. Ms. Hollingsworth advised not rapid, they would love to have another one in Jeffersonville, but they consider themselves to be smart business woman. There is a demand for them for people that come for car shows, daughter's basketball game or things that Jeffersonville is hosting. There are bad renters, bad guest bad in every aspect of life. Putting a moratorium in place is not the answer. Putting a committee together to discuss how to implement a registry or permitting process would be better. When you looked at other cities for their regulation, did you find that they had some? Ms. Hollingsworth advised, yes, but could not find any for Jeffersonville. She also advised that Air bnb for Indiana, taxes are withheld before they get paid. Councilperson Stoner advised that he was the only one that voted yes for the moratorium and the reason he done it with such urgency was to set up the committee, take advise from different stakeholders, put an abrupt stop in place so the system cannot be abused further. The moratorium does not have to be 365 day, it can be shortened at any time. Council President White asked if they live in their short-term rental. She advised, it is a second home, they live in Lexington. Councilperson Reed asked if they would be willing to buy a non-traditional place if residential was not available. They advised, yes, they would not rule it out. Part of the allure of the downtown corridor is the downtown corridor. A lot of them need fixed up, alley's need to be cleaned, porches need to be cleared. Those are not short-term rental people, there are bad seeds that will be weeded out, but they are here to stay. The housing market has nothing to do with short-term rental, the interest rate is why. 4. Veronica Magnuson advised she is here to support the temporary moratorium, give the Council the time they need to study it. We have talked about maintaining and improving the fabric of our neighborhood because we want a neighborhood where we know our neighbors and are able to help each other out. Tourism is great, but not always the priority. There are cities in Indiana, not just New Albany, but Carmel that have restrictions in place. She hopes that the right thing is done here tonight. 5. Jody Lloyd advised there is not going to be a cute little Jeffersonville anymore if the Airbnb's keep popping up. There are 2 and another one being built on her street, they take all the parking, they don't pick up limbs in the yard, not everyone is maintained. People that rent the Airbnb's do not send their kids to school. We need a limit to how many can be in one neighborhood. She is asking for some regulations. There is one short-term rental that has 3 floors, not sure if there are emergency doors or not. There needs to be codes enforced. If the Airbnb's were registered, then it could be monitored to limit them on each block. 6. Paul Maynard advised he and his wife have Airbnb's in Jeffersonville and New Albany and would be happy to take anyone on a tour. Most of their renters are traveling nurses, traveling professionals looking for a furnished place. They work with insurance companies that have clients that their house has burnt down and needs a furnished place to stay. It is just not people that are coming from out of town. They are judges very highly on the Airbnb site. There is national studies that show 0.05%of the cost of a home in areas that have Airbnb is actually because of Airbnb. They have had traveling nurses stay as long as 5 month, they are seeing our community and they are making it their home as well.The majority of the properties that they buy are homes that need full rehabs. They employee all local housekeepers, local children that are looking to mow grass, local pest control, maintenance crews and plumbers from Indiana. They are an adoptive family of 8, this gives them the opportunity to be home with their children. They not only rent the Airbnb's out, they recommend places for their tenants to go locally. They found out about the moratorium last minute, if he had had time, he would have went out and made businesses aware of this before the last meeting. 20%of growth revenue in restaurants in areas with Airbnb's are due to Airbnb's. Harvard business review has put this out, despite the fears that Airbnb's might lead to rent increases, the research has found that short-term rentals are not the biggest contributor to high rent, especially when it comes to the city's most vulnerable segments of a city's residence. Restricting Airbnb's is not going to be an effective tool for solving house affordability problems in the US cities. Councilperson Reed asked if they would be willing to buy a non-traditional place if residential was not available. Mr. Maynard advised, yes, however in Indiana, if your property is zoned commercial, the tax is 3%, which is triple what it would be for a standard home. If you buy a home in Indiana, property taxes are 1% and you get the homestead credit of 0.35%, so you pay 0.65% if you live in the home. Councilperson Reed asked if their rental are mainly more than 30 days. Mr. Maynard advised yes. Councilperson Stoner advised that he has been on both sides of this and he has not heard anyone on the Council say they are against Airbnb's or short-term rentals. There has been a lot of legitimate concerns about integrity of the character of the community and complaints about noise, trash or parking. Our number one responsibility as elected officials in Jeffersonville are the tax paying citizens and residents of Jeffersonville. The reason behind the moratorium is to take a moment to pause and figure out what is going on, then move on in to the future. Mrs. Maynard advised that makes sense, she encourages the Council to try and get the word out to people because people who have a problem are going to be the loudest. One of their homes in New Albany was on the historic home tour because they renovated a home from the 1800's. There have been many people rave about the home and neighbors renting it out themselves. The word need to get out to everyone, not just the ones that have a problem with it. She is not against progress or people buying homes to live in. She feels they are losing out on the character of Jeffersonville by not having people live in those houses. 7. Kim Seifer advised when she moved into her house in 2016, all houses in her neighborhood were owner occupied, with 2 of them being renters. There are currently 5 that is owner occupied, the rest are Airbnb's or short-term rentals, it's no longer a neighborhood, it's a destination. There is a reason why other cities have put moratoriums on Airbnb's, because they destroy the fabric of neighborhoods. People are not going to send their children to the local elementary school, people come to Jeffersonville and Louisville for the Bourbon Trail. She believe the majority of the money is being spent in Louisville, not here because Louisville has stopped Airbnb's. 8. Paul Torp advised he is an architect that resides on East Riverside Drive. He thanked Evan for inviting him and is not here to argue the pros and cons or the good and bad of Airbnb's or short-term rentals. There have been people come to the City to register them or to get a permit, but no one can find out where to go because there isn't anywhere, that is his concern. He thinks having a committee, registration, permitting or something would be great. He thinks the moratorium would be perfect because it gives you all time to think about that. 9. Pauletta Feldman advised as a homeowner and a resident of her neighborhood, it's where she lives, it's in her heart. She feels the short-term rentals in these neighborhoods are taking a residential area and turning it into a commercial endeavor, and that is not appropriate. She hopes that the Council will approve the moratorium. Councilperson Reed advised she wanted to clarify that short-term rental, in the proposal are for rentals that are 30 days or less, so it would not affect those traveling nurses or insurance claims that are there 3 to 6 months. Those are not considered within the Airbnb short-term rental. She is excited to hear that some of the investors would consider alternative buildings that are not residentially zoned for their enterprises. Councilperson Burns advised that oftentimes a 30 day short-term rental turns into 60 or 90 day due to an emergency type situation. That is a hole he sees in the moratorium, there is no mechanism there. There is no way to know what date that they acquired the property for sure and turned it into an Airbnb. Councilperson Stoner advised there is no way to know the difference between whether it's been a 30, 60 or 90 day rental and is curious as to why that has to be included in the ordinance. Council President White advised they have the ability to amend whatever needed. Mr. Merkley advised, right or wrong, Indiana General Assembly has preempted this issue of great vehicle compare us to Kentucky. They basically said, you are limited to what you can do as a local unit of government to regulate short-term rentals. One thing, you cannot prohibit any owner occupied short-term rentals for non-owner occupied short-term rentals. All you can do is require under your zoning code that they apply and seek a variance for special exception of the zoning appeals. If they go before BZA, they have to follow certain criteria by state law.They cannot arbitrarily deny a request for that special exception because it is a short-term rental. There has to be other issues for the record such as parking, meaning many people and that size of ability. Whether it's short-term rentals or not, a short-term rental state statute clearly says that those property owners have to follow all our general ordinances, whether it be noise, parking, sanitation. They are not exempt from the existing laws. He just wants to clarify that he drafted the moratorium for 365 days, you can shorten, and you have a lot of option in front of you. According to State Law, you can as the City Council, direct planning commission to initiate the process to mend the zoning code to require the special exceptions for short-term rentals. Mr. Wilder, Council Attorney advised to make that direction today, then consider your ordinance. Put language in that makes your expiration of your moratorium upon the enactment of the zoning change that requires special use variance, so you don't have to guess at how long it will take. Mr. Merkley advised them to start with the planning commission and then come back for review. We know if the amendment passes, which requires special exception, then we go away. However, because of the zoning code, we say short-term rental, you have to have a special exception. That does not mean that we can arbitrarily just deny that request to cause a short-term record. There has to be a record in front of BZA. When talking about the permitting process that is completely separate. Statute clearly says, whether it's owner occupied or non-owner occupied the city can require a permitting process. It's up to $150.00 or a onetime fee, even when it is renewed, it's an annual permit. That permit can be revoked after 3 strikes, however, there is an appeals process. Councilperson Semones advised she is exactly where she was when she asked for this issue to be tabled. We were in the fact finding stage and still are. There has not been any evidence provided regarding the issue at hand. There has been more input, but the fact that the proposed moratorium language is not available to the public is troubling to her. The fact that no information has been presented other than anecdotal evidence does not leave her feeling reasonably persuaded the moratorium is necessary or the correct answer or wouldn't have unintended consequences.The neighbors raised good points. Should there be reasonable limitations, what should those limitations be? She thinks members of the council and the public wants to see a moratorium so that we can then get answers. Her approach is different, she wants answers before action is taken. There may be a zoning approach that would be more practical as there's already zoning system in place, as there is no permitting process in place, there is no way to enforce a moratorium she we pass it. If we do decide to take a zoning approach, she will not be in favor of what we call a clause as suggested by the attorneys. They said, put a moratorium in place with an expiration when zoning happens. What if zoning never happens. There are too many unintended consequences that we can foresee that may outweigh the benefit that our neighbors are requesting, so she will continue to vote no. Council Vice President Hawkins advised he thinks they all are in agreement with many thing they have heard today, he thinks those things need to take place. He thinks they need a permitting process. His concern is what about people that have currently bought houses to turn into Airbnb's, that would put a halt to their progress among other things. A permitting process is what is needed, let's get that started and not worry about the moratorium. He is not for the moratorium. Councilperson Burns asked Council President White if it would be appropriate to ask JPD Chief Kavanaugh to speak on his experience with Airbnb's. Chief Kavanaugh advised there are not any significant or denotations that he can think of with Airbnb properties. Councilperson Reed advised that a permitting process would be a great way to understand what's going on in our neighborhoods and then potentially limit the growth in the areas. Now is time to take action. Councilperson Burns asked Mr. Reischl if there has been any discussion amongst their department about how the permitting process might look like. Councilperson Stoner asked Mr. Reischl if there had been discussion amongst his department about what the process might look like to enforce a moratorium. Mr. Reischl advised his department has had some internal conversations and the enforcement would be quite difficult. It is almost impossible for his department to see when someone buys a house and lists it on Airbnb or VRBO. He has been talking with a couple of different service providers in the last couple of weeks and it's been eye opening on how many platforms are actually out there. Councilperson Reed asked Mr. Reischl if a permitting process would be a viable option for the City. Mr. Reishl said he did see an issue with creating a permitting process but it would have to be created and taken to the Plan Commission to get it enacted. A form would need to be created in their permitting software. It may be difficult to get everyone who is operating an Airbnb to actually register but that is where the external services come in to pinpoint the people who are running Airbnb's or other short term rentals in the community but that does come with a cost. Councilperson Stoner asked if they approved the moratorium and then found a non-owner occupied rental was set up if the City could tell them to cease their operations. Mr. Merkley advised the City would have to prove that they were not grandfathered in and it may require going to court. Councilperson Semones asked Mr. Reishl if there were alternatives to a permitting process that may be more effective. Mr. Reishl advised Indiana Code does allow the City to make a short-term rental a special exception under the code in which case the applicant would have to go to the BZA for a hearing. Councilperson Burns said he believed that by amending the UDO it could require the owners to register and then a master list could be created. Council Vice President Hawkins said he believed people would be surprised to learn where the Airbnb's are located when they receive that information. They are located all over the City and not just in one area. Councilperson Reed asked if the Council decided they wanted to take action tonight and not have this over a year and instead asked the Planning and Zoning Department to come up with a permitting process and look into a special variance zone how long that process would take the department. Mr. Reischl advised something would have to be drafted and he would not be able to guarantee it would be on this month's Plan Commission docket but he could have it ready for the next month's Plan Commission docket. Council President White said what he is hearing is this matter has been on the table for a month and there is not a proposal to do anything about it at this point. If we send the ordinance which is a law to the platforms that they know about the would be obligated to abide by it. He feels that there is an issue that needs to be regulated and a six month moratorium would give them time to direct the Planning and Zoning department to start the process. Council President White made a motion to amend the moratorium to a six month moratorium in the documents and Councilperson Webb seconded the motion; Councilperson Stoner requested a roll call vote: Councilperson Burns—No Councilperson Semones—Yes Councilperson Anderson—Absent Councilperson Reed—Yes Council President White—Yes Councilperson Webb—Yes Council Vice President Hawkins—No Councilperson Snelling—Yes Councilperson Stoner—Yes Motion to amend passed, 6-2. Council President White made a motion to amend the ordinance to add: anybody who can demonstrate they were in the process of establishing a short term rental can be grandfathered in determined on a case by case basis and Councilperson Snelling seconded the motion; motion passed, 8-0. Councilperson Burns said he still has a concern about the timeline of the draft being produced. He would support a 60 day moratorium but he cannot support a 6 month moratorium. Councilperson Reed said she would support 60-90 days. Council President White made a motion to adopt 2024-OR-37 as amended on the first and second reading and Councilperson Stoner seconded the motion; Councilperson Semones requested a roll call vote: Councilperson Burns—No Councilperson Semones—No Councilperson Anderson—Absent Councilperson Reed —No Council President White—Yes Councilperson Webb—Yes Council Vice President Hawkins— No Councilperson Snelling— No Councilperson Stoner—Yes Motion to approve failed, 3-5. Councilperson Semones made a motion to recess meeting for five (5) minutes. Break taken at 7:48 pm. Meeting resumed at 7:53 pm. Councilperson Burns made a motion that the Planning Department work to draft an update to the UDO that requires an approval for a Short-Term Rental permitting process within 90 and also create a registry for Short-Term Rentals, seconded by Council Vice President Hawkins; motion passed, 8-0. 3. Les Merkley 2024-R-11 Resolution Approving Interlocal Agreement Between Jeff Redevelopment Commission, City Council and GCCS for Jeff High New Soccer Field Jeffersonville City Attorney Les Merkley advised this Ordinance was an Interlocal Agreement between Jeffersonville Redevelopment Commission, City Council and GCCS for a new Soccer Field that has already been approved by the Redevelopment Commission and GCC School Board where the Redevelopment Commission has committed $20,000.00 toward the infrastructure for improvements to the soccer field, specifically toward a new scoreboard.There is a new turf field going in for the soccer team/program. Council President White asked if this was discussed with anyone outside of Redevelopment and GCCS Board. Mr. Merkley advised, no. Mr. Merkley advised that the Mayor has been committed to helping the school corporation as much as possible with the TIF funds and this project would qualify due to it being a public improvement project that is located or serves and benefits the tax increment financing districts. Council President White made a motion to table 2024-R-11 until the next meeting, seconded by Councilperson Semones; Council Vice President Hawkins abstained, Councilperson Burns voted no; motion to table 2024-R-11 passed, 6-1-1. Mr. Merkley asked why the Resolution was tabled. Council President White advised that he would like to have further discussion about this. 4. Community Action of Southern IN Event Sponsorship Adrian Jamison, Executive Director at Community Action of Southern Indiana advised they are a nonprofit organization that serves Clark, Floyd and Harrison Counties. Their mission is to support those experiencing poverty to become more self-sufficient. They offer programs related to housing, health, community service needs and Head Start. She comes today to seek sponsorship for an event called FESTI-FALL at THE DEPOT on October 18, 2024 in the amount of$5,000.00. She showed a presentation regarding the event (see attached). Councilperson Reed asked Ms. Jamison if they are paying for space at The Depot or if they are asking for that to be covered also. Ms. Jamison advised that they are paying for the space at a nonprofit discounted price of $3,500.00. The sponsorship would contribute to the overhead cost and putting on the event. Council President White advised he will not be voting on this due to him representing Community Action in his practice, however, he does think it would be a good idea to sponsor at the presenting level of$5,000.00 and asked Ms.Jamison to explain what that includes. Ms. Jamison advised the biggest benefit is that the event would be 'presented by the City', the City will receive 10 tickets to the event, which includes in the press release, media material, logo signage throughout the event, a local band-Jesse Lee's, food trucks, local vendors. The can also be a banner displayed in the space if the City so chooses. Council President White advised that some of the other things that Community Action has done is completed a study on a splash park with its own funds and has been in communication with the City and Parks Department about how that could come about. They also have Head Start that currently has 230 kids enrolled. This fall they will be opening an Early Head Start for birth to 3 year old range at their current location. They provide Housing Choice vouchers in all three counties, weatherization services, a number of health programs, financial literacy education both to adults and youth. Council President White advised it's not very often that people get to hear about all the good that Community Action does in Jeffersonville as well as other counties. Council President White recommended this donation come out of Special Projects in the Riverboat Fund in the amount of$5,000.00. Councilperson Reed advised that the childhood education and support in our community are very important to creating the next generation. She would like to see in the future that potentially they look at the sponsorships that involve the venue so that they could write off the cost of the venue instead of donation money directly from the cost. Councilperson Snelling made a motion to approve the $5,000.00 sponsorship to Community Action from the Special Project line form the Riverboat Fund, seconded by Councilperson Stoner; motion passed 7-0-1, Council President White abstained. 5. Les Merkley 2024-R-12 Resolution Approving&Authorizing Petition for an Increase Above Maximum Levy Les Merkley, City Attorney advised this was the official petition to be filed with the Department of Local Finance to appeal and request an increase of the Maximum Levy. The appeal amount was stated in the Resolution at $2.7 million. Based on discussions with Baker Tilly, they do not expect to get that full amount. It will be at the discretion of the DLGF as to whether or not that appeal is approved and the dollar amount granted. Council President White advised what the City has been told is over the past three (3)years, the average growth was 12% and the State has been five (5). We are waiting on last year's numbers, which were due by each county by August 1, 2024 he believes. We have to wait until it was filed and the state has assessed for 2023 then Baker Tilley will be able to determine whether or not we will qualify. This will be the first step. The Resolution is passed, if it is approved, then Baker Tilley finds out or not we qualify, if it is affirmative, they will put together the application and send it to Department of Local Government Finance, then we do not have to worry about it, Baker Tilly will manage it. Mrs. Metcalf advised it will also be included in the advertisement for your budget, which is another opportunity for the public to see. Also keep in mind that the advertisement is also high because we do not know what these evaluation are, so those numbers will come down. Council President White advised this is another road we are going down to improve the financial health of the city, accomplish all things that we're trying to accomplish, which is essentially was to catch our services up with the expansion that we have experienced over the past number of years, is that the way you understand it Mr. Merkley? Mr. Merkley advised yes. Council Vice President Hawkins asked, this money has already been collected, some other government entity was getting this money and not us? Mr. Merkley advised yes. Council Vice President Hawkins asked, if they pass this Ordinance this year or the year after, there will not be one in Jeffersonville paying any more money,Jeffersonville will keep more of our own resident' s money, is that correct. Mr. Merkley advised yes. Council Vice President Hawkins clarified, no one is paying any more, we are keeping the money before we turn it over to the state and distributed to other entities. We will be able to keep our money that has already been collected, it is not an additional tax. We need to do a good job of telling people this will be money collected that will be able to keep more of right here to spend on the constituents that are paying it. Council President White said there was a motion and a second on the table and asked for a vote; motion passed, 8-0. 6. Les Merkley 2024-OR-38 Ordinance Amending 2022-OR-44 The Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance Mr. Merkley advised Ordinance 2022-OR-44 was adopted upon the recommendation of the DNR. Now that there are preparations of developing the former Jeff Boat property, they have realized under Article five (5), section B14 of the existing Ordinance, page 25 of the existing ordinance, they are proposing that paragraph sections and sub paragraphs A and I be removed as a result of this amendment. If this isn't done it will create a real hardship on developing along the river, specifically for Jeff Boat because what this requires for that development to happen, they have to make any flood remediation or any remediation on that property, they have to replace it on the existing property, which is nearly impossible. Almost all of that property is either in the floodplain, flood zone and is a very narrow piece of property, although it's a hundred acres, it's very narrow so it's just not feasible to do. When the City of Clarksville adopted the same ordinance, they removed that portion at that time due to having development along the river as well. Removing this from the ordinance would be prudent for future development. Council Vice President Hawkins made a motion to approve 2024-OR-38 on the First and Second Reading, seconded by Councilperson Webb; motion passed, 8-0. 7. Chad Reischl 2024-OR-39 (Public Hearing) Rezoning Change Request for 3.4 acre Property Located at end of Brisco Drive from R1 (single Family Residential-Large Lot)to Proposed Zoning R3 (Single Family Residential-Small Lot) Mr. Reischl advised their applicant was requesting property located at end of Brisco Drive be re- zoned from R1 (single Family Residential-Large Lot) to Proposed Zoning R3 (Single Family Residential-Small Lot) and possibly have access to Gilmore Lane. Most of the properties surrounding this particular site are either zoned R3 or R2. If this rezone was passed, it would be providing single family homes. There were several comments at the Plan Commission Meeting, mostly in regards to traffic on a narrow road. There were also comments in regards to the concerns with wetlands and possibility of an existing pond in this area and whether or not the soil is suitable. Mr. Reischl advised there were several people against this re-zone. The Plan Commission gave an unfavorable recommendation toward the Council at this time. Attorney Alex Gaddis with Stoll Keenon Ogden was here to represent Cornerstone Construction in the request to re-zone this parcel of land. He advised that it sits in the middle of developed area surrounded entirely, one side by a school and north and south was bound by our three to the north and two to the south. Throughout the Comprehensive Plan, the goal as stated therein was to develop these infill development areas with new subdivisions that can tap into the existing infrastructure to alleviate the additional cost of providing new infrastructure to new developments out and around town. This infill development would be entirely consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. He advised, supporting infill development that takes advantage of existing infrastructure and promoting neighborhoods that generate tax revenue per acre can go a long way toward building a fiscally stronger community, development of this property. Being that it's already surrounded by infrastructure means that there won't be a need to install and maintain significate amounts of infrastructure that serves in the neighborhood. The representative utilities have told them that the infrastructure does exist and would support this development. It falls within planning district 3, the riverfront District. The first goal as stated in that section of the comprehensive plan was to support small scale residential and fill development throughout the district, which was exactly what they are trying to do. Another stated goal was to support the goals and objectives of the Jeff Boat Redevelopment. He suggest that creating an owner operated subdivision would provide a bunch of customers to the new development. He advised, the land will get development, and if it was to get developed as it is now, it will not be consistent with the surrounding areas which are more dense. The only impediment now is getting through the Planning and planning phase that will occur, whether it's R3, R2 or R1. They would prefer to have that consistency of development and also have the input from Storm Water to the extent that there are some water issue on the property, which they do not concede. The satellite view shows that there is no standing water on the property, it's completely covered with trees, brush and shrubs. The goal should be to work with the developer who's willing to put his money up front and flat this in a way that channels the water away from anything that could be an issue, they won't be able to know what that is unless it has been designated at the proper zoning at this point. The bottom line was if they can start now with a consistent development that will integrate seamlessly into the neighborhood, tap into the existing infrastructure, and provide a client a roadmap to develop this in a reasonable, sustainable manner. The Mayor advised this was a drainage nightmare. Mt. Gaddis advised if you don't do anything, you keep the nightmare. If they could start now, start a plan to figure out how to solve the nightmare. He advised that he spoke with residents after the planning meeting and their main concerns were that they had water standing in their basement, their land staying soggy and wet. That is not going to change unless something is done. They are proposing a development that could with the working with the departments at the City of Jeffersonville, Wastewater, and Building. They all would have to sign off on this before anything could be done. The approval of the Council does not give the go ahead, it provides a roadmap to get started. One of the concerns with this re-zone has been the potential runoff issues. His client, Mark has agreed to a commitment to limit the development to 23 lots, which is more consistent with an R- 2 development. The reason they want to do that would be to lower the number of cars in and out of the subdivision. It would also provide greater retention and less impermeable surface area so the water could get into the ground and not cause runoff into areas it shouldn't be. If this remain at R1 houses would range up to $450 thousand, if it was rezoned to R3 they would ranch mid to high $200 thousands. The Council has the power to help provide the roadmap that will solve runoff problems, continue to facilitate the development of affordable housing for the residents of Jeffersonville. Mark with Cornerstone Construction advised he is trying to stay consistent and wants to make sure things are done right and be able to provide affordable housing. He had owned the property for a year now and has seen the drainage issue and feels that can be corrected. There has to be a plan put together to present to the commissioner to make sure they approve it. There will be an environmental study done so IDM can approve it. There will be a lot of things covered in that study. We are bound by the City, Council and Engineers say. They are requesting the re-zone so they can start the process of making sure this subdivision is possible. Councilperson Semones thanked them for the nice arguments and was R2 discussed at the planning meeting. Mr. Gaddis advised, no. Councilperson Webb advised that he was at the Planning meeting and R2 was not discussed, there were six or seven different groups that spoke out against this re-zone including the Mayor not that that decided the vote, parking was the issues. There was concerns about a pond on the property in question, however, that pond has been filled in and there are houses built there now. Councilperson Reed advised that there have been many houses built in her district that flood. When our Planning Commission gives and unanimous negative vote and constituents come out and advise against it, that says a lot. Mr. Gaddis advised, the property will be developed either way. Councilperson Stoner asked Mr. Reischl if someone else was trying to develop this land, would they have to go through the same process. Mr. Reischl advised, it depends on how it was being developed. Councilperson Stoner asked why they are not developing the property as it is now. Mark advised because they are trying to make it profitable. Mr. Gaddis advised that the people's concerns are legitimist, that if they are having flooding in their basement, this re-zone and building a subdivision could be the answer to that. What they are asking for right now is the green light to move forward to see if it would be feasible to build the subdivision at R3. Council President White opened the Public Hearing at 8:33 pm, there were no members of the community present to speak for or against the matter. Council President White closed the Public Hearing at 8:34 pm. Councilperson Semones asked Mr. Reischl if he had heard any new arguments for new support today or did he hear anything that would persuade him to reconsider the recommendation or to ask the zoning board to reconsider their recommendation. Mr. Reischl advised that in the beginning, they had said they wanted to build 30 homes and now they are saying 23. Councilperson Semones asked if a platform was provided. Mr. Reischl advised no, it is not required, it can be helpful. Councilperson Semones asked Mr. Reischl to describe the difference between R1, R2 and R3. Mr. Reischl advised R1 would be a minimum lot size of 9,500 square feet or approximately nine (9) plots. R2 would be a lot size of 6,500 square feet with a few more plots. R3 would be 5,000 square feet. Councilperson Semones asked if this re-zone was turned down today, could the applicants come back and ask for another re-zone of R2. Mr. Reischl advised they cannot ask for another re-zone of R3, they could come back later with a R2 re-zone request. Councilperson Stoner asked Mr. Reischl if the City would do any type of soil studies or would that be the responsibility of the developer, Mr. Reischl advised the developer would be responsible for that. Councilperson Webb advised that in the past, most developers go to the residents to let them know what their plan is, have a layout of the plan that would make things go a lot smoother at the Planning and Zoning meetings. Councilperson Burns asked how many lots were proposed. Mr. Reischl advised 30 originally, tonight they advised 23, which would be more feasible. Councilperson Reed suggested an R2 potentially in that area that would give the room to look at the drainage issues that are already there and speak with residents to get them on board. This property is in a landlocked area with very small streets. Councilperson Reed made a motion to consider denying 2024-OR-39. After a lot of back and forth discussion, Councilperson Semones advised she would like to have a favorable recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board and ask Mr. Gaddis to regroup, come back with a plat and the recommendation of the Council and take it back to Planning and Zoning for R2. Council President White asked if the developer would have to pay another fee if they request was modified to R2. Mr. Reischl advised that would be up to his department and he could consider waiving the fee. Councilperson Reed withdrew her motion to consider denying 2024-OR-39. Council President White made a motion to approve 2024-OR-39; motion failed, 0-8. 8. Heather Metcalf 2024-OR-40 Ordinance of Transfer of Certain Funds Within the Same Department Mrs. Metcalf advised this transfer was for Building Authority to transfer funds from Improvements to Repairs and Maintenance. They are replacing some pumps. Councilperson Burns made a motion to approve 2024-OR-40 on the First and Second Reading, seconded by Councilperson Stoner; motion passed, 8-0. 9. Heather Metcalf 2024-OR-41 Ordinance of Additional Appropriation Mrs. Metcalf advised this was for the electric for the Animal Shelter to get them through the end of the year. Councilperson Burns made a motion to approve 2024-OR-41 on the First and Second Reading, seconded by Councilperson Webb; motion passed, 8-0. 10. Heather Metcalf 2024-OR-42 Ordinance of Additional Appropriation Mrs. Metcalf advised this was for the Street Department for their 50/50 driveway program. Street Director Kevin Morlan could not attend tonight's meeting and advised Mrs. Metcalf that the 50/50 program pays 50% of new driveway curbs per the approach to the residents needing to lower theirs. This was also beneficial to the City to keep the residents from blocking their gutters, illegally pouring concrete devices and block the flow of water.The resident's pay the other 50%. This program is costing a little more due to the increase cost of concrete. Councilperson Burns made a motion to approve 2024-OR-42 on the First and Second Reading, seconded by Council Vice President Hawkins; motion passed, 8-0. 11. Heather Metcalf 2024-OR-43 Ordinance of Additional Appropriation Mrs. Metcalf advised this was for Building Authority for Computer Software Maintenance fees, to upgrade the computers throughout the City Building to Microsoft 365, travel and mileage, repair and maintenance, which is also more of the AC replacements. Appropriating some of their surplus funds. Council President White asked if$55,000.00 was for Software Maintenance Fees for Building Authority. Mrs. Metcalf advised, yes. We are currently on Microsoft 2019 and they are doing away with the support for that, so the City needs to migrate to Microsoft 365. Councilperson Semones made a motion to approve 2024-OR-43 on the First and Second Reading, seconded by Councilperson Burns; motion passed, 8-0. 12. Health Insurance Committee Formation Council President White advised there needed to be an insurance committee formed. It was made aware that there is already an insurance committee. Mrs. Metcalf advised there was an email sent out about a month ago. Council President White asked that it be sent out again. ATTONEY COMMENTS: Larry Wilder—No Comment Les Merkley---No Comment DEPARTMENT HEADS: No Comments PUBLIC COMMENTS No Comments COUNCIL COMMENTS: • Councilperson Burns—No Comment • Councilperson Semones---rigorous debate, the input from our constituents make her happy. • Councilperson Anderson—Absent • Councilperson Reed—everyone come out to National Night Out at Fort Fulton, 5:30 pm Tuesday, happy 75th Anniversary to Russ and Colleen Fisher, thanks to everyone that helped with Back to School. • Councilperson Webb—he thinks public comments shout be limited to 3-5 minutes, especially when there is so much on the agenda. • Council Vice President Hawkins—hope everyone got off to a good start this school year. This is his 29th year teaching. • Councilperson Snelling—No Comment • Councilperson Stoner—No Comment • Council President White—feels good work was done tonight, a lot of people were heard and felt respected. He is open to discussing putting a time limit maybe on the total discussion and limiting people from saying the same things to one person who represents the many, he wants to make sure people are being heard. ADJOURNMENT: Councilperson Burns made the motion to ADJOURN the meeting at 8:58 p.m. DISCLAIMER: These minutes are a summary of actions taken at the Jeffersonville City Council meetings. The full video archive of the meeting is available for viewing at www.cityofjeff.net for as long as this media is supported. APROVED BY: ilL97(4 Dustin White, Council President ATTEST: Lisa Gill, Clerk