Laserfiche WebLink
145 <br />APPROPRIATION <br />: $81,569 – REPLACEMENT OF COMMUNITY ATTENTION <br />VEHICLES. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he is awaiting additional information that he requested and was <br />not able to open the attachment on the e-mail that was sent. He said that when the Police <br />replaced vehicles they saved money by buying used vehicles, and he wanted to <br />conceptually bring that idea forward. He said he will wait for more information. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hamilton asked how time sensitive the vehicle replacements are. <br /> <br /> Mr. Robert Cox said that it is driven only by the age and safety concerns of the <br />vehicles. He said the vehicles are ten years old and there is concern with the vehicles <br />being rated in poor condition. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown suggested moving the appropriation and getting more information <br />prior to the second reading. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mr. Caravati, seconded by Mr. Lynch, the $81,569 Appropriation <br />for Replacement of Community Attention Vehicles was offered and carried over to the <br />next meeting for consideration. <br /> <br />PUBLIC <br /> <br />st <br /> Ms. Kathy Icenhour,500 South 1 Street, said that development is needed, but the <br />City is doing zoning too soon. She said people need to be educated on City services. She <br />said Social Services makes people more independent. She supported a living wage and <br />the Police Department. <br /> <br />OTHER BUSINESS <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati suggested that the School’s Strategic Plan be discussed at an <br />upcoming lunch meeting so that Councilors can formally comment on it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that he would like to propose broader action on tax relief for <br />homeowners to take to the General Assembly next year . He said he thinks the State <br />Code could be changed to create a separate classification and allow localities to set <br />differential real estate rates. He said if the City could have done that this year, the tax <br />rate for homeowners could have been reduced by 21 cents. He proposed a resolution <br />directing staff to develop additional options, to prepare a report to Council, and to discuss <br />those options with our elected representatives. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati made a motion to approve the proposed resolution, and Ms. <br />Hamilton seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said Mr. Lynch’s statement about homeowners not deriving income <br />from their properties may be proven untrue as they can make money by selling their <br />homes in an up market. He said this illustrates how complicated this discussion can be. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling expressed concern about the impact of this on renters who <br />frequently are low income because the business model says those rents will go up. He <br />also expressed concern about the impact on existing businesses as we are already in a <br />competitive market with the County’s lower tax rate. He said we need an economic <br />analysis, and moving forward without that information could be dangerous. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown said the City is asking for a tool given that assessments are going up <br />on homes faster. <br /> <br /> Mr. O’Connell said this is an issue we should be teeing up with other cities and <br />with Virginia First Cities. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hamilton said she did not support Mr. Lynch’s first version of the resolution, <br />but will support this one because it is an exploration of the issues and she thinks it is a <br /> <br />