As a part of the Carroll City Council’s hours-long budget workshops, the discussion on General Obligation (GO) bonding for street projects and the Carroll Rec Center renovations was discussed at length. In a special election last September, question one, eliminating a sunset date on the city’s Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.), was approved by voters. The other question, to issue up to $5.9 million in GO bonds to help fund the Rec Center renovations and addition, failed at 45.7 percent when a 60 percent plus one margin was needed. According to City Manager, Mike Pogge-Weaver, four new plans were proposed. Plan A would be full depth road reconstructions every three years and general maintenance in between using $500,000 annually from L.O.S.T. This would leave the required 25 percent for property tax relief and $797,131 for other city projects with a levy rate at $1.45 as compared to the Fiscal Year 2020 rate of $1.53008 and 2021 rate of $1.5017. Option B would include plan A plus full Rec Center improvements with a gym addition, aquatic center renovation and addition, locker room updates, an elevated walking track and more. This would require a voter-approved bond referendum of $5.615 million and council approval of slightly more than $7.436 million in GO L.O.S.T bonds over 19 years. This would leave about $280,000 per year for other projects and would raise the levy rate to $1.85 per $1,000 in taxable valuation. Option C included everything that option B did, but lowers the levy rate to $1.80. This change would be usage of nearly $9.637 million of L.O.S.T. over 19 years, leaving only about $135,000 annually for other city projects. Option D was a compromise on the amount of work at the Rec Center that keeps the debt levy at $1.46, but still leaves around $430,000 for other projects. Pogge-Weaver says this could be done without a public vote.
Your browser doesn’t support HTML5 audio
Council member, Jerry Fleshner immediately called for them to remove options B and C from consideration as they are too restrictive on future projects. Clay Haley and Carolyn Siemann agreed D was the best option to meet road repair needs and still complete necessary repairs and updates at the Rec Center. Mike Kots says he was ready to go full-force with option D. LaVern Dirkx had a lot of questions on L.O.S.T. funding that was already earmarked for other projects, such as the street maintenance building and the retail coach.
Your browser doesn’t support HTML5 audio
He was assured that there are backups for those projects with Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and road use tax funding. Fleshner pointed out that they may not be able to fully rely on guaranteed funding from road use taxes as hybrid and electric vehicles become more prevalent. Dirkx wants to make sure the public understands this can be done WITHOUT a referendum vote.
Your browser doesn’t support HTML5 audio
Haley agrees.
Your browser doesn’t support HTML5 audio
The council provided staff with direction to alter the budget to include option D, details for which are included below.
Click on images TWO times to bring to full size: