greenwood common council january 4...greenwood common council january 4th, 2017 minutes page 1 of 15...

GREENWOOD COMMON COUNCIL January 4th, 2017 Minutes of 15

I. Call Meeting to Order

The Common Council of the City of Greenwood, Johnson County, Indiana met in its regular session on Wednesday, January 4th, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. in the regular place, the Council Chambers of the Greenwood Municipal Building, 300 South Madison Avenue, Greenwood, Indiana. The Council President, Mike Campbell, presided and Clerk, Jeannine Myers, was present to memorialize the proceedings. The audience recited the pledge in unison, after which Rev. Shan Rutherford, of Greenwood Christian Church, led in prayer.

Present on the roll call were Council Members: Bruce Armstrong (“Mr. Armstrong”); Ron Bates (“Mr. Bates”); Mike Campbell (“Mr. Campbell”); Brent Corey (“Mr. Corey”); Linda Gibson (“Ms. Gibson”); Ezra Hill (“Mr. Hill”); David Hopper (“Mr. Hopper”); Chuck Landon (“Mr. Landon”) and David Lekse (“Mr. Lekse”). A quorum was obtained.

Additional Officials Present: Mark Myers ("Mayor Myers"), City of Greenwood Mayor; Krista Taggart (“Ms. Taggart”), Corporation Counsel; Mark Richards (“Mr. Richards”), Greenwood City Engineer; John Laut (“Mr. Laut”), Greenwood Police Chief; Terry McLaughlin (“Mr. McLaughlin”), Deputy Mayor; Jody Long (“Ms. Long”), Greenwood Controller; and Darin Hoggatt ("Chief Hoggatt"), Greenwood Fire Chief.

II. Approval of Minutes from the Regular Meeting on December 19th, 2016 Motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting on December 19th, 2016 moved by Mr. Lekse. Seconded by Mr. Bates. Vote: Ayes. Armstrong and Lekse abstained. Motion Carries. III. Audience Requests Gary Langston, President of Indiana Motor Truck Association (IMTA), addressed council regarding Ordinance 16-62. He stated the IMTA is the voice for trucking in Indiana, there are over 400 members in the association throughout the state. Mr. Langston stated the Vice President of the Association, Barbara Hunt, is also present. He shared a handout Indiana Fast Facts [attached] to give council some idea of the footprint of trucking in Indiana and the impact it has. Mr. Langston reviewed the handout and discussed the impact that Ordinance 16-62 would have if council prohibits trucks from driving on Fry Road. He said there are several municipalities that focus on their roads and whether trucks should drive on those roads. He said he certainly would not argue that certain roads, like Main Street in downtown Greenwood, is not ideal. Mr. Langston stated other proposals, like Fry Road, are more difficult for him to understand why we would not want trucks to drive on that road. He discussed the third whereas which states the public safety and welfare would be benefited by restricting truck traffic he said he is not sure of the history of possible historic occurrences and cannot speak directly to those, but in general, some of the reason he is concerned with road closures is it will increase congestion. He said if you take away part of the infrastructure but have the same amount of traffic but less roads, part of the problem with trucking is congestion. Mr. Langston stated the last thing even he wants is to be caught behind a line of trucks; he uses an analogy if there is a truck in front of him, he wants to get around the truck to get to the store to buy what he wants, not realizing that what he wants may be on that truck and he will have to wait at the store until it gets there. He declared when you close roads it increases congestion and increases cost to the industry impacting service negatively; with the biggest problem the trucking industry has is driver shortage. Mr. Langston stated there is a robust economy and the problem continues to get worse. He said the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) watches drivers very closely with the number one focus of safety; more time is spent making sure we do everything we can to operate safely in communities and on the highways and the FMCSA helps them do that by closely watching hours of service. He shared every time we are forced to go a path other than the most direct it uses up valuable hours that we would be using to travel from customer to

http://www.greenwood.in.gov/egov/documents/1484237396_06171.pdf


customer or state to state. Mr. Langston closed by asking council to consider a broad perspective when you decide to close any piece of infrastructure in your community because it would have negative impact on our industry. Kathy Steuer addressed council. She said she has live off of Fry Road for 13 years on Covered Bridge and 12 years on Ravenwood. She said she does not believe that Fry Road is conducive to truck traffic; specifically, between 135 and 31. Ms. Steuer said the other stretch from Madison to 31 can hold truck traffic. She has concerns with it being more of a residential area, the road is not wide enough, and the added traffic flow and congestion. Ms. Steuer stated one of the worst places on Fry Road is the curve, she cannot see a semi-truck staying in its lane. She said even after resurfacing the road, the entry way going to 135 is new and is supposed to alleviate congestion, now with trucks that try to come from 135 onto Fry Road with two lanes of traffic waiting, it would not be able to make that turn; we are not on par with Smith Valley Road, County Line or Main Street. She said this road is a small residential, with two parks on the street, kids cross the road. Ms. Steuer mentioned when the Emergency traffic comes through it is difficult to pull to the side for a small vehicle, she cannot see a truck that would have to utilize, the lanes are not the same size. She mentioned the two new cross walks, and a third coming in. She stated there is a weight restriction, there is a culver that has a 15-ton weight restriction Mr. Armstrong stated there is an 11-ton weight restriction right next to the Fire Station and would take precedent over the 15. Dale Marmaduke addressed council regarding home zoning and try to get that matched up with the other programs in Greenwood [attached]. Mr. Marmaduke said right now we are giving away money in TIF programs to anybody that pays dirt wages and paying money to bring in bad jobs. He said if we are giving money to call centers we need to have housing that matches; the new housing requirements, brick, offsets, etc. doesn’t match the income and jobs you are trying to bring in when you give money to these TIF programs. Mr. Marmaduke said he is data driven and shared a study that compared homes within Greenwood with the jobs that are being brought in. He stated who would want to build an expensive house around a bunch of low income homes with low paying jobs. He sated the city should have a unified plan, instead of the empty boxed building coming up you might want to think about tearing down the middle school and the hundreds of billions of dollars you could put in that to make it semi-acceptable to do anything with. He declared when pay money to a to a TIF program and buy and empty box, you lose a lot of opportunities. He said Ortho Indy is thinking about building another hospital on the south side; it is important to us to have some goo paying jobs and professionalism rather than another warehouse or truck diving people who are not going to make all that great money. Mr. Marmaduke stated we need to match that stuff up, who we are giving money to, and promises from the people we are giving money to. He declared we need to say if we are going to build a building, pay us money if you don’t have jobs that pay at least the average of Greenwood employees in the next two years, why should we pledge money who doesn’t pledge anything to us. Mr. Marmaduke asked to look at other programs that other city councils have done, for example Terra Haute got sold on a deal where they were going to take the sewage and make it a diesel fuel, the mayor signed off on it and the EDC signed off on it, with lawsuits going back and forth over the whole deal, these TIF companies are billion dollar companies sometimes. He stated they become billion dollar companies by having great sales pitches and selling cities much like out sporting goods store did. Mr. Marmaduke low houses are going up in assessed value and high houses are not, the reason for that is the low paying jobs the city is paying to bring in. Mr. Marmaduke hopes council will consider loosening the requirements on housing and increasing the requirements on TIF program giveaways. Ron Richardson addressed council a few months ago regarding a passing blister in front of Brandywine and asked if there was any consideration on that. Mr. Campbell stated council cannot vote to make that happen at this point, it would need to be placed into the budget. He said the information was passed on to the administration. Mr. Lekse stated it seemed to him that was pretty well received during that meeting by the city planner. Mr. Richardson thanked council.


Joseph Zygmunt stated he lives in the same community as Ms. Steuer, and wished to point out again the 11-ton weight limit and asked council if they know what the typical weight of a semi would be and how relevant is the limit that is posted on Fry Road… Mr. Campbell stated a full sized tractor with a bed would run 12 thousand pounds. Mr. Langston stated a tractor trailer is 80 thousand pounds. Mr. Campbell asked if that was a maximum including load. Mr. Langston verified that to be correct. Mr. Campbell stated if it was loaded that would exceed, most of them do not get up to 80 thousand but an empty tractor trailer may be closer to 20 thousand pounds or 10-tons. Mr. Zygmunt asked if that gives some added relevance to the… Mr. Campbell stated if there is a weight restriction a truck would have to follow it; this ordinance would not affect the problem on traveling. Mr. Zygmunt asked if any trucks were to try to use it would there be monitoring. Mr. Campbell stated truck drivers are very aware of weight limits and bridge heights and know what routes they can and cannot travel before they arrive in a city, if one did by mistake, turn onto Fry Road if the police saw them they would be stopped but other than that there would be no way to enforce that aside from catching them in the act. Mr. Zygmunt stated based on the information it sounds like Fry Road should be disqualified on the stretch the limits are posted and he thanked council. John Lindstrom lives within the Crystal Lakes subdivision off of Smith Valley Road and stated he understands and agrees with the plea of the people on Fry Road; more inclined to agree with Mr. Zygmunt, if that will force more truck traffic onto Smith Valley Road it cannot handle more traffic than what it is doing right now. Mr. Lindstrom stated things have gone bad, the increased speed limit of up to 40 mph has made pulling out of the subdivisions onto Smith Valley Road extremely dangers, and to complicate it further with additional truck traffic and more traffic in general it will be even worse. Mr. Campbell stated he is not sure it will increase truck traffic, there is probably not a lot of trucks using Fry Road now, the only other roads are County Line, Main Street, and Smith Valley those are the ones most likely being used presently anyway. Mr. Lekse stated we cut off Main St. Mr. Campbell clarified not from 31 to 135. Mr. Lekse stated but you cannot get from Madison Ave to 135 on Main St. under the proposed. Mr. Campbell said that is correct. Mr. Lekse stated it will still increase traffic on Smith Valley Road, it has to. Mr. Lindstrom stated it further complicates it, he understands why the High School has a traffic light in front to safely get people out of there; he said this just adds another layer of congestion and traffic. IV. Reports

A. Corporation Counsel

Ms. Taggart stated at the next meeting they will have the annual IDEM Report.

B. Controller

None.

C. Committee & Board Reports Mr. Campbell stated the RDC Report was distributed, and asked if there are any questions. Mr. Hill stated the Plan Commission did not meet. V. Ordinances and Resolutions

A. Notice of Intent to Consider None.


B. First Reading

ORDINANCE NO. 16-77 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2017 SALARY ORDINANCE, COMMON COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16-50, TO ADD POSITION OF PART TIME PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR IN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT (Sponsored by Mr. Hopper) Motion for the first reading of Ordinance No. 16-77 moved by Ms. Gibson. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. Motion to suspend the rules through second reading moved by Mr. Corey. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Mr. Armstrong asked if this position needs to be filled when the Community Center opens. Mr. Corey stated it will be opening soon so he figured they should be able to start trying to fill the positions. Mr. Campbell stated the Community Center should be opening soon. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. Motion for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-77 moved by Ms. Gibson. Seconded by Mr. Corey. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries.

C. Second Reading ORDINANCE NO. 16-62 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 8, TRAFFIC AND PARKING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 2, TO ADD SECTION 8-8 ESTABLISHING RESTRICTED TRUCK ROUTES (Sponsored by Gibson)

Motion for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-62 moved by Ms. Gibson. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Mr. Lekse stated this ordinance has changes rapidly and significantly, and speaking for his constituents who live along Smith Valley Road, they have not had an opportunity to see the latest version that came through at 3:00 pm or the 10:00 am changes which took Fry Road off of the list of approved truck routes, which will increase traffic off of Smith Valley. He said he understands the people who live along Fry Road and all of the concerns that they had; they had an opportunity to understand what would happen to their neighborhood and react to that; at the last meeting Smith Valley Road was not even on the map as a designated truck route according to the minutes; now Smith Valley Road is on the map, on the list of approved truck routes, Fry Road is off the map and the people who live in neighborhoods along Smith Valley Road have not had the same opportunity to consider how this might impact them. Mr. Lekse stated we have talked about many times before, traffic is horrible on Smith Valley Road, and by taking Fry Road off of the list of routes, or more generally by limiting the routes trucks can take to certain roads, the traffic along Smith Valley is going to get more heavy, but we don’t have plans, as far as publically known to do anything with Smith Valley Road and the citizens of Greenwood who will be impacted by that have not had ample opportunity to consider this and weigh in. Mr. Lekse stated for that reason he was going to propose a motion to postpone it until the next meeting so the people who live along Smith Valley can have the same chance to have their voices heard as the people who live along Fry Road. Mr. Campbell stated the only thing he would say to that is the map he had does have Smith Valley on it, and it did at the last meeting. Mr. Lekse stated according to the minutes… Mr. Corey stated the map that was projected on the screen… Mr. Campbell clarified he is just clarifying the map that was given to him at the last meeting does have Smith Valley. Mr. Lekse argued according to the minutes of the last meeting Smith Valley wasn’t on the map yet, it was talked about but was not on the map so therefore it wasn’t publically known prior to the meeting. Mr. Hopper started he thinks they were talking about the stretch between Emerson and 31. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Corey agreed with Mr. Hopper. Ms. Gibson asked what council thinks about reverting back to the original ordinance that was Introduced on September the 7th; the purpose of that was to restrict traffic on Main Street between Emerson and US 31; Alexander St. between Airport Parkway and Country Aire Lane; and




Country Aire Drive between Country Aire Lane and Emerson. Ms. Gibson stated that was the initial movement to restrict traffic in the downtown area where we have already had significant problems, also because of truck traffic that leads to Oaken Barrel and goes out through the neighborhood. She stated it was asked then that we look at extending that and having the Ad HOC committee that met, with proposals that came back from that meeting. Ms. Gibson recommends at this point and time to ask legal counsel to go back to the original ordinance and move forward. Mr. Bates asked if we would make a motion to that effect. Mr. Campbell stated the best way would be to defeat this ordinance and come back with a new ordinance at the next meeting, which could be requested without a motion. Mr. Landon stated one of the reasons we put it off initially was to define truck; there was a lot of confusion to whether it was a large straight truck or a semi. He continued this particular ordinance defines a truck as a semi or tractor trailer; if we go back to the wording from Country Aire and Main Street but we also need to put in a definition of truck. Ms. Taggart stated from a legal perspective, because Ms. Gibson referenced that expressed text that was from that meeting, she could move to amend the current ordinance to the text that was presented on the night of September 7th subject to the definition of truck to being changed to what it is in the current… Mr. Campbell stated the only issue he would have with that, everything we have discussed up to this point has been something different and then to completely replace the wording with different wording really creates a new ordinance and he would like to see that go through the process. Ms. Gibson stated in addition to that, we had prohibited the operation of trucks or other commercial vehicles and we have changed that; she feels it is best to defeat the one we presently have and then ask Ms. Taggart to come back with what was pretty much the initial one that limited to only semi-trucks. Mr. Lekse stated the people from the trucking industry stated we agree trucks should not come thru Main Street near downtown; he continued, we started off with a problem that could be addressed surgically, and there has been a lot of hard work put into this, but what we are looking at today is a solution that takes the opposite of a surgical approach, we have gone from prohibiting truck traffic thru a few areas to only allowing it thru a few streets, which has gone back and forth as recently as today, he would like to also suggest taking it one step at a time. Mr. Lekse stated the step by step approach is much wiser. Mr. Campbell stated this is a consensus he is getting from council. Ms. Gibson clarified the original intent was not to make it more difficult for trucks but to eliminate the semis and larger trucks from going through local neighborhoods just to bypass other traffic; which is what got us to this point, and the AdHoc committee met, they were going by the guidance we were given from council. She also agrees it is best to step back, take care of our immediate needs and see where we fall from there. Mr. Armstrong said he looked at the Indianan Department of Motor Vehicles website and thinks a better definition of truck is one that is currently charged with the commercial motor vehicle excise tax and proceeded to read the definition and stated he would like to use that as the definition of truck. Ms. Taggart requested Mr. Armstrong send the link. Mr. Campbell asked it seems there is a consensus to defeat Ordinance 16-62 and asked if anyone who wishes to speak opposed to that, there was no comment. Mr. Campbell requested a Roll Call for the second reading of Ordinance 16-62. Vote: Nays. (0-9) Motion fails.

ORDINANCE NO. 16-75 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING GREENWOOD COMMON COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 88-75, AS AMENDED, AND GREENWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE (1993), AS AMENDED, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6, SECTION 2-38, TO AMEND THE SCHEDULE OF ORDINANCES SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS BUREAU (Sponsored by Campbell and Bates) Motion for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-75 moved by Mr. Landon. Seconded by Mr. Lekse. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. ORDINANCE NO. 16-76 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING GREENWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE (1993), AS AMENDED, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 2, DIVISION VIII REGULATING PEDDLERS, SOLICITORS, TRANSIENT MERCHANTS, STREET VENDORS AND




MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS AND REPEALING CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE 10, SECTION 6-352 (Sponsored by Campbell and Bates) Motion for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-76 moved by Mr. Lekse. Seconded by Mr. Hill. Mr. Landon stated 1993 was a different world, almost 24 years ago, and he said he does not particularly like the idea of people going door to door anymore. He said he has spoken with many people in the community and has not found anyone who likes the idea of people knocking on doors anymore; he also commented on how our shopping habits have changed over that last twenty-three years with the internet and e-shopping, groceries can be delivered now. He declared there is no longer the need to do business the old fashioned way; his motion to amend this to eliminate peddlers and solicitors in the city of Greenwood. Mr. Landon stated it is time we end that practice and move forward into the twenty-first century with this law. Mr. Hopper declared that would include girl scouts and high school students selling pizzas. Mr. Landon stated he is willing to change the amendment for that, which is more of a training exercise to teach our children to be responsible and how to do business; he said that is not an unreasonable change to what he just said. Mr. Corey suggested making it for anyone soliciting for a non-profit. Ms. Gibson stated that is too wide. Ms. Taggart suggested they be careful, constitutionally speaking they cannot regulate the content of what people are saying, and suggested council be content neutral unless they have a reason that will survive scrutiny. Mr. Hopper asked if we could include the AT/T and Comcast’s of the world or do they have special protection. Ms. Taggart stated that any employee of a video service franchise company that holds a certificate by the state, cannot be prohibited from soliciting because they have lobbied the State of Indiana effectively and have the right and local municipalities cannot regulate that. Ms. Gibson declared the age of twelve for girl scouts is way too low as there are seniors who continue to participate. Mr. Armstrong asked how places like Oberweis Dairy and Schwann Foods be covered by this. Mr. Landon declared they do not knock on doors to gain business, you can call and invite anybody on your property, as a homeowner we should be able to regulate who comes on our property and with an ordinance like this we have the police who will enforce this and this makes it simple when folks are peddling they will be in the wrong. Mr. Landon stated this is a good thing in this day and age for our community. Mr. Campbell questioned if this does not in any way affect religious organizations or politicians. Ms. Taggart said as long as they are not selling anything. Mr. Hopper stated it seems the most egregious folks are the magazines from out of state, they report to be of high-school age. Mr. Lekse agreed with Mr. Landon amendments but to do what we can along the lines of legal limitations. Mr. Corey stated the largest group who knock on doors, the AT/T and Xfinity guys, cannot be told not to and they are the biggest culprit in his opinion. Ms. Taggart asked if it is the desire of the council to go as Mr. Landon requests, she suggested council move to postpone this for a meeting and direct staff to return with a draft that generally prohibits as much as possible under the constitution; her concern is there are so many interworking parts to try to amend may get messy. Mr. Hopper asked why don’t we pass this one and come back and make an amendment later on, put us in compliance with the law. Mr. Bates agreed according to the verbiage in the ordinance as presented meets the legal mustard. Ms. Taggart stated that this ordinance does. Mr. Campbell asked for verification, currently, without this ordinance we are not in compliance, this ordinance would put us in compliance. Ms. Taggart said that is correct and part of the genesis behind this ordinance was to strip out the content in the prior one and to also update and modernize it; you could, as Mr. Hopper suggested, pass this one, which would strip out the content of the last, which would make it compliant with Reed vs. The town of Gilbert, and then instruct staff to come back at the next meeting with an ordinance that would repeal portions of this, amend it so that soliciting was banned to the fullest extent possible under the constitution. Mr. Landon stated he could live with that; he said this is a different world right now, he doesn’t want people going door to door, doesn’t feel it is healthy or safe anymore. He continued it is not Mayberry anymore, if we can eliminate people from doing this, it makes our community safer and that should be part of our job. Mr. Campbell stated we will vote on this without an amendment, have counsel… Mr. Hopper stated we are amending it, by raising the age. Mr. Corey said he would like to raise the age to sixteen. Mr. Campbell


questioned why don’t we put all those together and have it amended at the next meeting. Mr. Hopper said they are selling Girl Scout Cookies now. Mr. Corey said he chose sixteen because if you are older than sixteen and probably driving. Ms. Gibson requested seventeen. Motion to amend Ordinance 16-76 to raise the age limit from twelve to seventeen moved by Mr. Corey. Seconded by Ms. Gibson. Mr. Landon asked for verification on the next meeting to remove peddlers and solicitors. Mr. Campbell verified that we would instruct counsel to come up with the appropriate language to do that. Ms. Gibson asked to place limitations on hours. Ms. Taggart stated there are limitations sunrise and sunset. Ms. Gibson asked if we could make that specific hours. Mr. Corey declared sunset in July and August… Ms. Taggart stated it cannot be arbitrary or you are restricting people’s speech you have to say… Mr. Corey asked why don’t we use the same hours as the noise ordinance. Mr. Campbell stated he doesn’t want people knocking on the door after dark. Ms. Taggart stated that was why they used the ones they did because you could theoretically say, daylight time would be safer than not daylight time. Ms. Gibson asked to consider an hour before sunset, there are a lot of people who come to your door when its… Mr. Campbell asked to vote on this amendment. Mr. Campbell requested a roll call on the amendment to raise the age limit from twelve to seventeen. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. Mr. Landon asked about the license application and any possible fine if it is falsified. Ms. Taggart stated the application says there are fines if any persons or company convicted of violating these provisions shall be fined not less than fifty dollars or more than twenty-five hundred dollars for each offense. Mr. Landon is content with that information and asked about the police or background check he would like to go to seven years and not just four years in GMC Section 4-102 (a) (3). Mr. Hopper asked Chief Laut about a standard number of years to do a background check. Motion to amend the background check from four years to seven years moved by Mr. Landon. Seconded by Mr. Bates. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. Mr. Campbell requested a roll call for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-76 as amended. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. Mr. Campbell clarified corporation counsel will bring amendments to the next meeting that address Mr. Landon’s previous concerns. RESOLUTION NO. 16-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE GREENWOOD COMMON COUNCIL TO AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 07-12, “A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT AND APPROVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF GREENWOOD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF IND. CODE § 36-7-4-500 et seq. AS AMENDED”, TO UPDATE OR INCLUDE VARIOUS PLANS (Sponsored by Campbell and Bates) Motion for the second reading of Ordinance No. 16-26 moved by Mr. Landon. Seconded by Mr. Lekse. Vote: Ayes. (9-0) Motion carries. FOR FINAL ACTION CONFIRMING, MODIFYING, OR RESCINDING THE GREENWOOD COMMON COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 16-24; AND RESOLUTION NO. 17-01 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING RESOLUTION 16-24, THE DECLARATION OF A CERTAIN AREA WITHIN THE CITY OF GREENWOOD AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA AND QUALIFYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT AND SETTING THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING (VANTRUST REAL ESTATE, LLC) (Sponsored by Campbell)




Motion for the second reading of Resolution No. 17-01 moved by Mr. Gibson. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Mr. Campbell opened the public hearing. Dale Marmaduke addressed council hoping they will vote against this resolution and make billionaire’s even richer. He said it is not a depressed area, a depressed area is the middle school that will be needing this money badly, make the city better with the money, fix Fry Road, get police with the money, make infrastructure with the money but not pay billionaires to build an empty building and give you low paying jobs. Mr. Marmaduke asked council to please vote against these programs. Mr. Campbell addressed Mr. Marmaduke, saying he has the impression he thinks the city is taking money out of their bank account and giving it to them. Mr. Marmaduke stated everybody should pay the tax rate and not one business selectively giving [inaudible]. Mr. Campbell wanted to clarify they are not being given cash but tax abatements. Mr., Marmaduke stated Toms’ Barbershop is more deserving than these out of state billionaires, being given or earning… Mr. Campbell wanted to clarify by the way Mr. Marmaduke presented it, it sounded like he thought the city was writing them a check, of which we are not. Mr. Marmaduke stated if they pay the tax and you give it back to them in a check, he considers it a gift. Ms. Gibson added one of the ways we are able to work at keeping residential tax rates down is through commercial development; if we did not have commercial development such as the Greenwood Park Mall and new businesses coming in, you would find your residential tax would go up. She continued you have to have incentives in order to bring new business in. Mr. Marmaduke says he sees us lobbying to increase taxes with a new food tax, which look to him like an increase, and he sees we are paying money for low paying jobs… traffic problems on Smith Valley Road is causing your housing values to not go up if you have a nice house. He continued it is not free enterprise; free enterprise causes things to work properly, gifts to certain businesses… there is no more deserving than Tom’s Barbershop, you are selectively choosing people because of their great sales pitch are somehow deserving, like Sun Tan City is somehow not deserving. Mr. Marmaduke stated he thinks it is very wrong. Mr. Hopper stated if Sun Tan City or Tom’s Barbershop wanted to come and build a $15 million dollar building that pays 3% taxes here in Greenwood, they would get a tax abatement too. Ms. Gibson shared due to the tax caps we do not have the flow of income that we used to have; one of the main reasons for pushing for the food and beverage tax is to hire additional police officers. She asked if you turn your TV on and hear all of the murders and incidents that are going on in Marion County, we are very fortunate we haven’t had those move more heavily into Johnson County; she declared we need more police officers and a food and beverage tax will help us to hire more officers. Mr. Marmaduke countered bringing in low paying jobs brings in more crime; taking money away from the school gives lower schools and less... Mr. Corey addressed the chairman if the public announcements should be about the ordinance on the floor. Mr. Campbell concluded he was responding to questioned asked to him by the council. Mr. Marmaduke apologized. Mr. Campbell closed the public hearing. Mr. Lekse reiterated his comments when businesses apply for the abatements, filling out the SB-1 stating certain promises such as size of building, number of jobs at a specific rate, the reason they fill out the form is so that after the abatement is granted, if it is, we can measure them in future years. Mr. Lekse cited that Van Trust Real Estate, LLC., rightly or wrongly, promised the city zero jobs at zero dollars per hour; in other words, as long as they meet that promise, we can’t hold them to the fire going forward, we can’t reverse this abatement. Mr. Lekse stated he has a philosophical problem with that kind of application and declared he cannot support that. Mr. Hopper stated the abatement is for the building not for the jobs that are going to be in it, that will be for the next company that comes and fills the building with their property... Mr. Lekse stated they could still make an estimate, the box where they would write that in says estimated. Mr. Hopper stated we have recourse if they don’t build the building they say they are going to build then we end the abatement, that is our recourse.


Vote: Ayes: Campbell, Gibson, Hill, Hopper, and Landon. Nays: Armstrong, Bates, Corey, and Lekse. (5-4) Motion carries. Councilmember Hill excused himself from the remainder of the meeting.

VI. New Business - Introduction of New Ordinances and Resolutions ORDINANCE NO. 17-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6, SECTION 2-38 OF THE GREENWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE (1993) DESIGNATING NO PARKING ON BROADWAY STREET (Sponsored by Gibson) Chief Laut addressed council regarding the situation surrounding emergency vehicles accessing the areas around ISOM Elementary safely specifically during peak hours of drop off and pick up. He said it is a transient school with new students coming in and a lot of car riders, has created a horrible parking situation on Broadway that we would not be able to get an emergency apparatus through. Chief Laut stated they are asking to make the south side of Broadway from Meridian to McKinley no parking to allow access for the emergency vehicles. He said this will force the parents to line up east on Broadway and filter to the school to pick up their children, instead of parking haphazardly all over the street. Mr. Campbell clarified the real problem is not residents but people picking up school kids. Chief Laut said that is correct, he has spoken with residents who are supportive of this; the only thing is to request an amendment to be between certain hours, weekends are not an issue. Chief Laut stated if we make it Monday through Friday 7:30 am -4:30 pm then that will work. Mr. Campbell asked about the map provided, there are five houses but one with no driveway. Mr. Corey stated they park in the back, possibly through the alley. Ms. Gibson stated she received an email from a resident who will be affected and they are ecstatic the city is doing this, they have had trouble getting out of their own drive. Mr. Corey stated he would like to amend to make the hours to apply 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Friday to account for rush hour traffic. Motion to suspend the rules through first reading moved by Mr. Hopper. Seconded by Mr. Bates. Vote: Ayes. (8-0) Motion carries. Motion for the first reading of Ordinance No. 17-01 moved by Ms. Gibson. Seconded by Mr. Corey. Motion to amend Ordinance 17-01 to set the hours effective 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Friday made by Mr. Corey. Seconded by Ms. Gibson. Ms. Gibson asked about summer months when school is not in session. Mr. Corey feels it can be left the same as residents don’t park there. Mr. Campbell requested roll call on the amendment. Vote: Ayes. (8-0) Motion carries. Mr. Campbell requested roll call on first reading of the amended Ordinance 17-01. Vote: Ayes. (8-0) Motion carries. Motion to suspend the rules through second reading moved by Mr. Corey. Seconded by Mr. Lekse. Vote: Ayes: Gibson, Hopper, Landon, Lekse, and Campbell. Nays: Armstrong, Bates, and Corey. (5-3) Suspension Fails. ORDINANCE NO. 17-02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 9, SECTION 2-97 OF THE GREENWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE (1993) ADDING CASH CHANGE FUND FOR THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE (Sponsored by Bates and Lekse) Ms. Taggart stated this is providing the Clerk’s Office a change fund similar to what Parks and Court have; payments for OVB are made though the Clerk’s Office.




RESOLUTION NO. 17-02 A RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN AREA WITHIN THE CITY OF GREENWOOD AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA AND QUALIFYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENT AND SETTING THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING (Dermatology Inc. d/b/a Mid America Pathology Services) (Sponsored by Gibson and Campbell) Ms. Taggart stated representatives called before the meeting and requested council move to postpone it a meeting; they were not able to make it tonight and wished to make some revisions to their presentation following the RDC meeting yesterday and would like to present at the next meeting. Mr. Armstrong questioned why they could not have first reading and presentation both at the next meeting. Mr. Corey stated they could postpone it at that point. Ms. Gibson asked if they are on a tight schedule. Mr. Campbell stated it was their decision. Ms. Taggart said they called, she did not have an opportunity to ask... Ms. Gibson commented she feels it best to let the introductions go through. RESOLUTION NO. 17-03 A RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENT (Scannell Properties #293, LLC) (Sponsored by Gibson and Campbell) Mr. Campbell stated in light of the discussions we have had regarding abatements, there are discussions going on about other possibilities or things we can do in these speculation buildings, we are hoping to have something we can bring before the council before the next meeting to help eliminate some of the concerns which are understandable. Katie Culp, president of KSM Location Advisors, part of the Katz, Sapper & Miller Network, a local accounting firm, addressed council with a few slides. Ms. Culp introduced her client Ian MacDonald of Scannell Properties and discussed the project scope and a few policy issues as it relates to speculative projects, she thanked council for their thoughtful consideration on this issue. Mr. MacDonald, Development Manager with Scannell Properties, introduced the history and current developments of Scannell Properties. Ms. Culp mentioned her experience sharing she has been in economic development for seventeen years, with the first six years spent in the public sector as an economic development director, her longest stint in Lebanon, a community smaller than Greenwood but similar elements. She stated this specific request is a 232,000 sq. ft. project that is being contemplated adjacent to the Wurth Service Supply building that is already under construction. She noted it would be a speculative project, in that there is not yet a tenant, the anticipated real property investment, not including any ground or potential equipment that may be placed in that building ultimately, is just under $9.4 million. She mentioned although the plans have not yet been finalized for this project, the rumor mill gets to work in the commercial real estate world and the broker who would potentially be marketing this should the project come to fruition has already had three different prospects trying to find out if this building is indeed likely to happen and what the timeline potentially would look like. Ms. Culp pointed out the reason for this is because in 2014 and 2015 a lot of speculative buildings were constructed in the Indianapolis region and were snatched up quicker than anticipated; then in 2016 there was an absence of buildings this size and larger so some of the developers around the region have started to do this construction for a number of speculative buildings. She added many communities in this region really raised speculative development and they said if you will build a building, we know what the investment will be, we know what the taxes will be and we can run the return on investment model and look at whether this makes sense; if the benefit of the tax, even an abated building, the addition to the tax revenue, because abatement is a phase in the tax liability and not a full holiday, tax is generated on the ground, the equipment and increasing the amount of building over time, if that’s worth it or not. She observed some communities have struggled with that more, the speculative nature of not knowing who the tenant is, is a real challenge to that but regardless of how the nuances of some of these different communities have dealt with it, the reality is, there is not much inventory out there anywhere in this Indianapolis region. Ms. Culp verified when you compound that with the labor market situation, where unemployment is low everywhere, and she is sure there are Greenwood employers who are challenged with finding the right types of




workers that they need right now, but they are faring much better than some of their counterparts in Plainfield, Lebanon, and Whitestown where they have dozens and dozens of vacancies for these operations. She noted this bodes well for Greenwood in that not only do you have a stronger work force than a lot of your communities in the region because, while labor is still tight, you are seen as having higher unemployment and broader geography that you are pulling from for workers from more rural parts of this and neighboring counties. She added the combination of the workforce and potentially have inventory with the building, makes Greenwood very interesting to new economic development projects that are coming to the entire region that will be moving to the state, or those that are also relocating to the region. Ms. Culp indicated the size of this building is very important because of those speculative buildings that are being constructed right now in the region, a lot of them tend to go towards the million square foot size; those tend to attract the really large scale distribution, industrial, logistic, the Amazon’s and Walmart’s of the world that are straight up distribution and don’t tend to necessarily attract a different type of skill set or higher value added function in the building. Ms. Culp attested this building is initially being set up to potentially be broken into four, but can certainly accommodate one user with this size, but she assured it is not big enough to attract these bulk warehouse jobs where a lot of discussion on both sides of the aisle on whether those are good jobs or not, but they do tend to be a little lower skilled. Ms. Culp claimed this size of building is putting Greenwood in a position to attract a variety of uses; some of which may be logistics but it also very well suited for manufacturing, production, assembly and higher skilled types of positions, a lot of those operations tend to have heavier equipment, more capital investment in personal property as well. She continued in a perfect world you would always be able to do a build-to-suit project for users that know far enough in advance that they want to construct a building and move somewhere; in today’s environment where there are buildings available in our region but also in other cities of like sizes, if you don’t have inventory, and a building available to attract those users you will get eliminated from the competition from the get-go. Ms. Culp reasoned she wanted to tie that in, in addition to the general presentation, in hopes that it is useful to council as they contemplate what their policy will look like. She declared speculative development is widely misunderstood; while it is more difficult politically to state we want to support this without knowing exactly who the user is, what the specific number of jobs will be and their wages, you are also taking a pretty calculated risk in knowing you will be getting this tax revenue and you are positioning your community in a way that it can compete both in the regional economy and perhaps even nationally to attract an economic development project that needs a building right away; more quickly than being able to wait the lifetime of new construction. Ms. Culp indicated that the labor force within Greenwood is seen within the region as being very strong. She stated Mayor Myers and her have had some conversations about that; even at a recent ULI conference Greenwood was touted as being a trail blazer compared to some of the other competing sub-markets in the Indianapolis region; the labor is really strong. She said the access to the highway is very good and there have been some early inquiry to the project already even though it hasn’t been finalized or decided or marketed in any way. Ms. Culp shared a few renderings of what the project would like. In conclusion, Ms. Culp remarked this group understands very well how abatement works but she wanted to mention again, it is a phase in a tax liability, so indeed there is a valuable benefit that will be passed on to a future tenant which enables Scannell to compete with all the other buildings that have full property tax abatement on them; the savings are passed through to attract a tenant. In addition, she stated there are significant taxes that will be paid on the building that they are planning to construct, in addition to the ground and potential future equipment. She asked if there were any questions from council, there were none, and she thanked council. VII. Miscellaneous Business

A. Council

Mr. Bates nominated Mike Campbell as Council President for the year 2017. Seconded by Mr. Landon.


Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Voice Vote to appoint Mr. Mike Campbell for Council President. Voice Vote: Ayes. (8-0) Motion Carries. Mr. Campbell thanked council sharing it has been an honor to be council president this past year, he appreciates the vote tonight and looks forward to being the president in the coming year. Mr. Campbell opened nominations for Council Vice President. Mr. Landon nominated Mr. Ron Bates. Seconded by Mr. Armstrong. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Voice Vote to appoint Mr. Ron Bates as Council Vice President. Voice Vote: Ayes: Armstrong, Campbell, Corey, Gibson, Landon, and Lekse. Nays: Hopper. (7-1) Motion Carries. Mr. Campbell opened nominations to the Greenwood Plan Commission. Mr. Bates nominated Mr. David Lekse. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Mr. Hopper nominated Mr. Brent Corey. Seconded by Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Vote to appoint Mr. David Lekse to a Greenwood Plan Commission seat: Armstrong, Bates, Landon, and Lekse. Vote to appoint Mr. Brent Corey to a Greenwood Plan Commission seat: Campbell, Corey, Gibson, and Hopper. Due to a tie vote Mr. Hill will remain as representative until the next meeting where council will vote again. Mr. Campbell opened nominations for two appointments to the Redevelopment Commission. Mr. Armstrong nominated Mr. Randy Goodman. Seconded by Mr. Landon. Mr. Lekse nominated Mr. Mike Campbell. Seconded by Ms. Gibson. Ms. Gibson nominated Mr. Don Cummings. Seconded by Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Vote to appoint Mr. Randy Goodman to a Redevelopment Commission seat: Lekse, Armstrong, Bates, and Landon. Vote to appoint Mr. Mike Campbell to a Redevelopment Commission seat: Lekse, Armstrong, Bates, Campbell, Corey, Gibson, and Landon. Vote to appoint Mr. Don Cummings to a Redevelopment Commission seat: Campbell and Gibson. Mr. Hopper abstained. By a vote of seven (7) Mr. Mike Campbell is appointed to the Greenwood Redevelopment Commission. Motion Carries.


With a vote of four (4) for Mr. Randy Goodman, and two (2) for Mr. Don Cummings, the current representative, Mr. Don Cummings, will continue to hold the second seat until a majority vote is reached. Mr. Campbell opened nominations for the Greenwood Community Development Corporation. Ms. Gibson nominated Mr. Paul St. Pierre. Seconded by Mr. Lekse. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Voice Vote to appoint Mr. Paul St. Pierre to the Greenwood Community Development Corporation. Ayes. Motion Carries. Mr. Campbell opened nominations for the Johnson County Solid Waste Board. Mr. Landon nominated Mr. Brent Corey. Seconded by Mr. Bates. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Voice Vote to appoint Mr. Brent Corey to the Johnson County Solid Waste Board. Ayes. Motion Carries. Mr. Campbell opened nominations for the Greenwood Social Board of Directors. Mr. Bates nominated Mr. Charles Landon. Seconded by Mr. Lekse. Mr. Campbell closed nominations. Voice Vote to appoint Mr. Charles Landon to the Greenwood Social Board of Directors. Ayes. Motion Carries. Mr. Corey pointed out some displeasure with CDS, and he has already spoken with Mr. Richardson about this, there was a permit issue on a house on Curry Road which the city had commitments on it for that plat to have brick all on the first floor. He stated the permit was issued without the brick being all on the first floor and it is his understanding that the builder is having to go back and brick the first floor. Mr. Corey stated this has happened before in the same neighborhood; once he can understand, twice it starts becoming an issue. He said if something needs to be looked at internally to ensure this does not come up again; for no other reason than it looks bad on the city. Mr. Corey stated the builder probably should have known that it needed to be brick on the first floor but we did improvements for their drawings. Mr. Corey shared a resident reminded him when the city allowed the Greenwood Christian Academy to put up their signs, it was supposed to be all red lettering and no animations as part of their commitment. He said they are doing animations and multicolored signage on it; we go through this every once in a while on this. Mr. Armstrong has several complaints about the size of the recycling bins; I understand the reason why. He said the easiest way to take care of that would be to be able to give them a number that it would go up if we were to use the smaller bins. He asked if that price was available. He asked if there was an expense for them to use the smaller bins then… Mr. McLaughlin stated he would be happy to have a discussion with Best Way to see if that is an option. Mr. Armstrong stated if we can say that going to the ones we currently have saves us x number of dollars then we can pass that on; it was his understanding we went to the new ones because it was a cost savings. Mr. McLaughlin stated yes it should be but we the city residents did not pay for those trash cans, that was funded by the company; the company put out several hundred thousand dollars; he would be more than happy to ask. Mr. Armstrong clarified he is not looking to go back to the old system. Ms. Taggart stated Mr. Armstrong is looking for a number to inform residents


about the reason why this change was done. Mr. Corey stated to quantify why we chose this because it saved us x amount of dollars. Mr. McLaughlin spoke on that saying the foot print, coming every two weeks; with that recycle bin you were getting only 18 gallons verses 96 gallons; the footprint of the larger bin is taller but overall the footprint is only ten inches larger than the smaller. Mr. McLaughlin priced the 96 gallon bins and they are just under $100 for the similar quality. He shared the amount we are able to collect, the carbon footprint, emissions, that aspect of being able to… Ms. Taggart stated from a cost perspective, they are able to have one person on the truck opposed to two because it is fully automated. Mr. McLaughlin stated the next time contracts are bid you probably wouldn’t be able to get hand picking for trash; we received one bid this last time from the six companies that pick up, but they cannot fulfill the commitment of actual curb pick up so the automation is… Mr. Campbell stated when you speak of the footprint you are referring to the bottom of these new trash cans are only ten inches larger, but because of the way they are made, the tops take up a lot more room than they used to; the complaint he has heard is while they fit in the same spot, they can’t pull their car in because the top of it sticks out too far, HOA’s won’t let them leave it outside; while we have ten to fifteen thousand customers He admittedly has only talked to a handful but he has had more than one tell him that this is going to keep them from recycling not help them recycle. Mr. McLaughlin stated they picked up 5,500 bins; they are thinking there are probably roughly a percentage of people who weren’t home but they have handed out 5,800 carts, and thy still have 4,500 they still have to; they are excited about the impact. Mr. Armstrong shared his personal use, the other ones were too small for him, he filled them up too quick and didn’t use them as much; now he has more in recycle and less in trash right now. Mr. McLaughlin readdressed Mr. Armstrong’s question and stated he will speak with Best Way and will provide council an answer. Ms. Gibson asked if all bins that have been ordered have been delivered. Mr. McLaughlin stated like everything that is a city wide service, there were two ways to sign up, electronically or by mailer, but if people mailed in the card but they did not, or it got lost; he said it has not been a perfect process but the number of people that we deal with, it’s been smooth compared to what it could have been. He shared the Best Way provides a good service, they have supervisors out to make sure bins are off the street and following up with other issues as well. Ms. Taggart stated we are still getting requests, when we came back there were 300 requests received over New Years; so the people who have requested after the deadline or later may have not yet received their bins yet. Ms. Gibson stated the specific resident got their request in prior to her own being sent in, well before the deadline. Mr. Armstrong shared another request, some people were out of town on the last old recycling bin day what do they do with the old recycling bin. Mr. McLaughlin stated they can contact Best Way who will send someone by to pick it up, the new trucks do not have a place to collect and stack the old bins. Ms. Gibson have a larger bin they use for trash, once it is emptied it is always left in front of the mail boxes; can we say something to Best Way to make sure they are not blocking the mailboxes; also, can we think about having some type of campaign on the website to explain why we are doing what we are doing, to get information out there. Mr. McLaughlin stated he believes it had already been done, maybe not on the website but by mailers. Ms. Taggart clarified the mailers were sent to everyone in their sanitary sewer bills, it was promoted multiple times on Facebook, we held an open house for the public, we went out to the school, tried to reach out to The Social but were unable to coordinate with a date, we have done quite a bit of outreach but we can certainly look and see if adjustments need to be made to what is posted on the website, but we have had at least two or three events Western Regional, Rock the Clock, and another city festival so we have been out… Ms. Gibson stated she realizes we have the flyers in with the bills, but people get into the habit of looking at the bill and tossing the rest of it; she feels we need to educate people because like Mr. Armstrong said she has a lot of people say they won’t be recycling because they don’t have room for the big bin; she said we need to change their mind. Mr. Armstrong followed up with that was a reason for asking for a monetary cost so we can give them a reason for doing it. Mr. Bates asked about feedback from the Find It, Fix It program. Ms. Taggart stated it has been live for four days and said she doesn’t believe we have a ton of credits rolling in the door; similarly, we have had a public education and outreach for that. She continued last year they met with home inspectors and plumbers and starting in January-February we will be reaching out more directly to the homeowners and expects that will gain more

GREENWOOD COMMON COUNCIL January 4th, 2017 Minutes of15

traction in the next month or two. She said we have not received any negative feedback for it, but it is a little early to tell at this point as it went live on January 1. Mr. Campbell asked if the homeowners can use any licensed plumber of their choosing. Ms. Taggart stated if they are licensed that is correct.

B. Audience

Don Cummings thanked council for his appointment last year to serve on the RDC; he is asking for clarification on the process going forward since both Mr. Goodman nor he received a majority vote tonight. Mr. Campbell stated at the next council meeting they will bring this back up again, ask for nominations, one of the issues tonight there was only eight present to vote so we will go through the same process again at the next council meeting on January 15th for seat number two.

Randy Goodman also wondered about the procedural question and additionally posed a question to the city. He shared that the noise levels where he lives have increased over the last several months especially around 2-3 am; increased to the point that even in the daytime the back of his house is shaking, he doesn't know how to control that noise. He asked if it is the responsibility of the city to do a noise study or Circle K. Mr. Corey asked if he knew what is causing the noise. Mr. Goodman said it is people in their cars with loud sub woofers, the music is not loud, it is the low frequency vibration ; even driving on Worthsville in the daytime, driving by his house, you can feel them from the roundabout until they are about three to four houses past him. He shared it is literally shaking the ground of our homes back there. Mr. Goodman thanked council. Ms. Taggart stated that would be a noise violation if it was on somebody else's property traveling that distance, but it would have to be observed as it was happening. Mr. Hopper asked if it not a noise violation on the city streets as well; if an officer pulled up behind them they would have a meter. Mr. Corey stated they don't need a decibel reading based on our ordinance. Mr. Armstrong stated he believes the ordinance states if it is detectable from a specified distance. Ms. Taggart shared the ordinance Sec. 5-277 Noise Regulations states it shall be the duty of every Owner, Occupant, manager, agent, or operator of any property, Structure, vehicle, or business in the City to prevent Persons using property under his/her control from violating this Section. Mr. Corey made a recommendation to look into it and see what we can do and report back at our next meeting.

C. Other Miscellaneous

1. Corporation Counsel

None.

2. Controller

None.

D. Mayor

None.

VIII. Adjournment

With no further business the meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. Next regular meeting of the Greenwood Common Council to be held on January 15th, 2017, at 7:00 p.m.

(~~ L'.9'k,JeannineM}lel"

\ - 4 · ,-, C\

Indiana Fast Facts I

TRUCKING DRIVES THE ECONOMY

"' ~ .. ' ,.. . , *---' ""- /-- ~ ... -~* 1J *"' * * J * * * t *

• Employment: In 2015, the trucking industry in Indiana provided 192,590 jobs or 1 out of 13 in the state. Total trucking industry wages paid in Indiana in 2015 exceeded $8.5 billion, with an average annual trucking industry salary of $44,207. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported in May 2015 that heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers held 50,480 jobs with an average annual salary of $43,240.

• Small Business Emphasis: As of April 2015, there were 13,070 trucking companies located in Indiana, most of them small , locally owned businesses. These companies are served by a wide range of supporting businesses both large and small.

• Transportation of Essential Products: Trucks transported 73% of total manufactured tonnage in the state in 2012 or 417,517 tons per day. 80.3% of Indiana communities depend exclusively on trucks to move their • d

TRUCKING PAYS THE FREIGHT •As an Industry: In 2014, the trucking industry in Indiana paid approximately $943 million in federal and state

roadway taxes. The industry paid 49% of all taxes owed by Indiana motorists, despite trucks representing only 11 % of vehicle miles traveled in the state.

• Individual Companies: As of January 2016, a typical five-axle tractor-semitrailer combination paid $6,252 in state highway user fees and taxes in addition to $8,906 in federal user fees and taxes. These taxes were over and above the typical taxes paid by businesses in Indiana.

• Roadway Use: In 2014, Indiana had 96,698 miles of public roads over which all motorists traveled 79.2 billion miles. Truckin 's use of the ublic roads was 8.4 billion miles.

•Continually Improving: In 2014 the U.S. large truck fatal crash rate was 1.23 fatal crashes per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This rate has dropped by 73% since the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) began keeping these records in 1975. The 2014 fatal crash rate for the state of Indiana was 1.35 per 100 million VMT.

• Sharing the Road: The trucking industry is committed to sharing the road safely with all vehicles. The Share the Road program sends a team of professional truck drivers to communities around the country to teach car drivers about truck blind spots, stopping distances and how to merge safely around large trucks, all designed to reduce the number of car-truck accidents.

• Safety First: Indiana Motor Truck Association members put safety first through improved driver training , investment in advanced safety technologies and active participation in industry safety initiatives at the local, state and national levels. The I MTA works closely with state enforcement agencies to focus on areas that will have the reatest impact on safet .

• Fuel Consumption: The trucking industry continues to improve energy and environmental efficiency even while increasing the number of miles driven. In 2014, trucks consumed 97 billion fewer gallons of fuel than passenger vehicles in the U.S. and accounted for just 17% of the total highway transportation fuel consumed.

• Emissions: Through advancements in engine technology and fuel refinements, new diesel truck engines produce 98% fewer particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions than a similar engine manufactured prior to 1990. Sulfur emissions from diesel engines have also been reduced by 97% since 1999.

• Partnerships: Through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) SmartWay Transport Partnership, the trucking industry is working with government and businesses to quantify greenhouse gas emissions and take ste s to reduce them.

INDIANA M OTOR TRUCK ASSOCIATION

Updated November 2016 with most recent data available.

.---.-AT R I ~,~:~~:atlon .-._ ~· Researth ...... ___ = * lnslilule

/- J+- l't b

Dale Marmaduke 1153 Pilgrim Road

Greenwood, In 46142

December 18, 2016

Request to match new home construction requirements

with TIF giveaways and

to protect citizen property values

(Lets be data driven)

Greenwood passed ordinance 6.22.24.02 stating a desire to "maintain property values". The new Design

Standards have the opposite result, in fact reducing property values. By looking at the property assessment

values, we can see how well these costly brick, homes with excessive setbacks in the home and roof compare with

standard practical home. We will also look at the expectations for the future values.

We are all surprised with the city council passing the new highly restrictive standard, which few homes in the city

come close to matching. (Insulting to these residents.) The idea that multiple setbacks are somehow an

attractive feature is lost for those who enjoy the clean lines of an attractive and colorfully painted home. Wood

homes are much easier to modernize and change. The city should not force their "good taste" on those who have

"good taste" w hich differs.

For maintaining homeowner value, those without the multiple setbacks and brick have fared much better in

Greenwood over the past five years. I made a semi-random lookup of property assessed value in the public

database. The county assessor reviews and assigns value based on like homes and sales. In comparison, we find

the clean line/no brick homes did better at maintaining value and even increasing in value. I strongly believe this

trend will continue based on city government po licy.

First, I looked at five no-brick homes. Three homes in Northern Park, two in the Coopers Division as in the table

be low. These homes would represent the values surrounding for this type home quality affordable homes.

Address/ Assessment Square Price per

% 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Sq Ft I

Year Feet 2012

Increase

1141 Pilgrim Rd $115,900 $112,300 $109,500 $106,900 $109,300 1,323 82.62 6.0%

1165 Pilgrim Rd $124,700 $120,800 $116,500 $113,400 $116,100 1,788 64.93 7.4%

612 Gooseberry Ln $78,400 $75,900 $67,000 $66,800 $68,500 960 71.35 14.5%

647 Park Drive $74,700 $72,300 $69,400 $68,700 $69,900 1,325 52.75 6.9%

641 Park Drive $83,500 $80,700 $78,500 $63,200 $64,500 1,300 49.62 29.5%

Average 12.8%

Increase

I then performed the same task looking for homes with brick and multiple setbacks. This task is not that easy, as

"setback good taste and multiple rooflines" is not that popular. The best I could do for a short study:

Address/ Assessment Square Price per

% 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Sq Ft I

Year Feet Increase 2012

1873 Drexel Ct $255,700 $255,700 $255,700 $255,700 $255,700 3,571 71.60 0.0%

1127 Wyndham Way $160,500 $ 147,300 $171,900 $167,300 $163,600 1,572 104.07 -1.9%

332 Webber Way $169,000 $161,500 $147,300 $152,400 $157,600 1,817 86.74 7.2%

1974 Woodfield $294,700 $28,060 $271,100 $273,500 $275,900 2,775 99.42 6.8%

255 Lawnwood Dr $201,700 $181,400 $204,600 $199,400 $202,300 2,760 73.30 -0.3%

Average 2.4%

Increase

We see the homes without brick, steep roof, multiple setbacks, and even attached garages have a value increase

five times those of the more costly brick homes. We see a total value increase in the first group of $48,900 and

only $26,500 for the second group. Dollar and percent show increased value for the smaller homes without the

"features" found in city ordinances.

If the building ordinances are not changed, this trend will become continue to a greater extent. As only brick

homes with setbacks are allowed to be built, the current homes with the same features will have greater sales

completion, dropping value. The non-brick affordable home with growth will be in greater demand and increase

in price.

To magnify the issues are the City of Greenwood's policy aga inst schools and the policy to give money to those

who "create" more low paying warehouse jobs. Greenwood is in the process of giving a couple million for to a

big-time government subsided builder for empty bui lding. Box buildings seldom result in high paying jobs. The

city has agreed to pay for low paying jobs to be moved from Marion county. These new business need the cheap

labor that can only afford to live in featureless homes. Without low cost featureless homes, we will have more

and more cases of multiple families living in a single family home, decreasing neighbor home values. Or, without

low cost housing, the business who received cash gifts will not be able to find labor that can afford to work in the

warehouse. Remember, the current generation is the first to be earning less than their parents. These people

need homes t hat retain value and are affordable.

Good paying jobs and good businesses move to areas with good schools and parks. Good families are willing to

pay extra home prices for good schools. Good jobs follow good people. Giving millions of dollars to bring in

poor jobs with TIF money taken from schoo ls will decrease property va lues. These TIF give-away programs are

subsidizing poor jobs to decrease home values in a race to the bottom.

The money give-a-way programs needs to match the housing standards. Perhaps we shou ld request public

subsidized housing to better supply low-pay labor for the new jobs and business Greenwood is paying to obtain.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we could go back to what the country is based upon. The very simple concept of "Free

Enterprise". (Free Enterprise -- freedom of private business to organize and operate fo r pro fit in a competitive system without interference by government beyond regulation necessary to protect public interest and keep the national economy in balance. Not free when some get city cash gifts.)

Remember: We have a million dollar white elephant middle school that will require millions to demolish or considerably more millions to modify the school

to a semi-usable building. Buildings that are not good enough for a public school have little va lue for anything else. Unless .. perhaps the school could be

converted to low-cost housing for the low-pay warehouse employees jobs the city is paying to obtain.

Scannell PropertiesGreenwood, IN

Prepared by:

Katie Culp

President

KSM Location Advisors

T: 317.452.1986

[email protected]

Alexis Sowder

Multistate Project Manager

KSM Location Advisors

T: 317.452.1994

[email protected]

Ian MacDonald

Development Manager

Scannell Properties

T: 317.218.1647

[email protected]

© 2015 KSM Business Services, Inc.

Scannell Properties

• Privately owned real estate development and investment company focused on

build-to-suit (BTS) projects throughout the U.S. and Canada

• Developers of the Wurth/Service Supply Distribution Facility

• Founded in 1990, HQ in Indianapolis

Additional offices in Washington, DC, Cincinnati, and St. Louis

• 25 years/200 projects/20 Million SF Developed

Over $1,000,000,000 in annual volume

• Clients include Alcoa, Apria Healthcare, FedEx, Gold’s Gym, ITT Educational

Services, Scott’s Lawn Care, Wausau Window & Wall Systems, Wesco Distribution

70% of their business is derived from repeat clients


Project Overview

• Consideration of a 232,500 SF Speculative Building in Southpoint Business Park

• Adjacent to Wurth/Service Supply Development

• Anticipated real estate investment to be $9,393,042.00

• Facility will be marketed to prospective tenants in the logistics, manufacturing and distribution

industries

• Increasing competition for industrial spec development in Indianapolis and surrounding counties

• Metro Indianapolis market crushed absorption records in 2016 (Vacancy from 6% - 3%)

• Only 1 potential competing building in Greenwood (138,000 SF)

• Greenwood ranks high with available labor and is emerging as a top growth industrial

market


Project Overview

Assumptions of potential future tenant:

• Target tenant will seek a good labor draw and easy access to the highway – the tall clear height

will likely attract a tenant with heavy automation

• Estimation of wages for jobs to be created could range from $12.00 - $15.00/hour depending on

specialty

• Early inquiry on this project has been robust


Project OverviewProposed Project Site


Project OverviewRendering #1


Project OverviewRendering #2


Abatement Request

• 10-year traditional real property abatement

• Estimated tax abatement and paid values over 10 years are:

REAL PROPERTY TOTALS

ABATED $1,098,090 $1,098,090

PAID $1,120,210 $1,120,210


Conclusion

Questions?

greenwood common council january 4...greenwood common council january 4th, 2017 minutes page 1 of 15...

Documents