November 2005 Status Report

It is my pleasure to submit for your review and consideration my monthly status report. If you should have any questions about items in the report or something I have not covered, please do not hesitate to contact me.

1. Borden Building

Obviously we were pleased with the very positive support we received from the citizens of Mt. Pleasant for this project. As you know, we have quite a bit of work ahead of us negotiating all of the agreements with J.E. Johnson. As you recall, the timeline would have us occupy the building some time in the spring of 2007.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the staff who were involved in carrying out the informational campaign regarding the project. Kathie Grinzinger took the lead in this effort with the assistance of Jana Ervin, Michelle Sponseller, Jane Sundberg, and other members of the Public Information Committee including Eric Van Hevel, Chris Bundy, Jeremy Howard and Micki Smith. I think they did an excellent job laying out the facts of the project. My thanks and congratulations go out to all of those involved.

I would also like to thank the City Commission for your support of this project. Over the past week or so I have received many positive comments about the project and the fact that they feel it is not only a good thing for downtown, but a good project for the community.

2. Construction Projects

Our construction projects for this year are now completed. Duane Ellis tells me that the good fall weather has allowed them to get a good head start on engineering for next year’s projects. We use this time to do all of the field and survey work that is needed so that we can design the projects over the winter and bid them in late winter or early spring. The last project finished up this year was the resurfacing of Harris Street. As I mentioned earlier, we had some problems with some settling manholes, and we were concerned about potential liability if cars struck those manholes. The project was originally intended to be done in 2006, but we were able to get the same price from Central Asphalt for resurfacing that they had bid earlier for other projects, so we deemed it wise to complete the project this year.

3. Temporary Traffic Control Orders

We have four temporary traffic control orders that will be acted upon for final approval by the City Commission within the next couple of months.

• Install “Police Vehicles Only” signs on the south side of Chippewa Street from Court Street to University Street

• Install “Stop” sign on the north side of Pickard Street at the intersection of North Washington Street

• Install “Stop” sign on North Drive at Elizabeth Street

• Remove “Yield” sign and install “Stop” sign on the east side of Glen Street at Hopkins Street

4. Downtown Intersection

As you know, we have had some concerns, particularly from pedestrians, about the change from traffic control signals to stop signs in the downtown. The Traffic Control Committee met on this issue, and has decided to install some rather large “Pedestrian Crossing” signs at those intersections. The signs make it clear that vehicles are to stop for pedestrians at the intersections. They will be installed as soon as we receive them. The Police Department has met with people at Riverview Apartments and sought their input on this proposed solution to the problem. As the Mayor indicated at the meeting Monday night, this is still a trial period, and we’ll see if these signs help address the pedestrians’ concerns.

5. Washington Street Crossing At Anspach Hall

As you know, there has been considerable concern expressed by a professor at the University regarding the safety of that particular pedestrian crossing. Once again the Traffic Control Committee has reviewed this issue, and has recommended that we install similar “Pedestrian Crossing” signs at that pedestrian crossing. Duane Ellis has talked to Stan Dinius, the CMU Police Chief, and he indicates that he would support this as a possible solution to the problem. The Committee is very reluctant to install additional stop signs along the street as there is already one just a few hundred yards further south of that pedestrian crossing. The concern is that when no pedestrians are present at the crossing, the cars will not stop or do roll stops through the intersection, and then when pedestrians are there the drivers will be out of the habit of coming to a complete stop, which could lead to an automobile-pedestrian accident.

6. Village Builders

Village Builders purchased the remaining land available on the east side of Sweeney over to Chase Run Apartments. They have begun construction of their condominium project, and currently have two fourplex units under construction.

7. Tribal Two Percent Reallocation

Approximately four years ago the Tribe allocated $250,000 toward the acquisition of right-of-way for the proposed ring road project. After we received the allocation it was determined that the Road Commission has sufficient right-of-way to complete the project when funds become available. A couple of weeks ago I requested that the Tribe reallocate that money to the West Broadway Revitalization Project. I was requested to appear before the Tribal Council and provide them additional information as to why we were requesting the reallocation. We have received notification from the Tribe that they have reallocated that money from the ring road project to the West Broadway Revitalization Project. Obviously that helps us with the project, and I appreciate the Tribe’s cooperation in this matter.

8. Cell Towers

We continue to work with Verizon on completing the agreements for construction and lease of the cell towers.

9. Project 2000 Tax Case

I mentioned in my last status report that we had submitted all of the required briefs and are waiting for the Supreme Court to make a decision as to whether or not they will hear this case. I also indicated that it could be anywhere from six to nine months before we get a decision on our request for a hearing. In the meantime, Wayne County has filed an amicus brief in support of our position. The County did a good job highlighting the importance of the issue statewide, and because of this urged the Court to hear the case. The other thing about this brief is that it will help insure that this matter is given more attention than the routine, mundane application for leave to appeal presented to the Supreme Court. At this point we can do nothing but wait for the Court’s decision on whether or not it will hear our appeal.

10. House At 611 North Washington

As you know, Code Enforcement has increased its effort to deal with homes that have been in substandard condition for quite some time. One of those is the structure at 611 North Washington, which is next to the Post Office. In April of this year the property owner took out a building permit to repair the roof along with re-roofing and re-siding the building. As of the end of October, no work has been done on the structure. In October, Brian Kench, our Building Official, sent a letter to the property owner indicating that since no action had taken place on the structure he was revoking the building permit and referring it to the City Attorney’s office for action. We will continue to pursue this matter until the home is taken care of.

11. Legislative Issues

There are a couple of legislative issues I would like to bring to your attention.

House Bills 5096 and 5097: Together, these two bills would put in place a new method of taxing commercial rental property by exempting such property from the general ad valorem property taxes under the General Property Tax Act and levying a new specific tax on that property instead. The reason for these bills is to address the Michigan Supreme Court’s 2002 decision in which the Court said that an increase in value in a property’s occupancy rate could not increase the property’s taxable value beyond the constitutional assessment cap. This issue is tied directly to Proposal A, which indicates that capping the taxable value of a parcel of property is limited to 5 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. So what is happening is that if there are reductions in occupancy, the taxable value on the property goes down. Unfortunately, if the occupancy rate goes up, there is not a corresponding increase in taxable value. House Bill 5096 would address that issue by specifying that an increase in occupancy rate could be counted as an addition if either a loss based on a decrease in occupancy rate was previously allowed, or if the value of new construction had previously been reduced because of a below-market occupancy rate.

This bill would create a new act, the Commercial Rental Property Specific Tax Act, to impose the new specific tax on commercial rental property. The tax rate under this new law would be the number of mills assessed in the local tax-collecting unit, as if that property were subject to the General Property Tax Act, and the base would be the adjustable taxable value. The tax would be payable in the same manner as taxes collected now, and the tax revenue would be disbursed by the tax-collecting unit to other taxing units in the same manner as currently provided.

It is my understanding that the bills have passed both the House and Senate, and are now waiting for the Governor’s action. The problem with these bills is that they become effective as of December 1, 2005, and there are no processes, guidelines or forms available at this time for implementation by our local assessors and the Tax Commission. It is also my understanding that the revenue to be generated may be lower than originally anticipated, and the Governor may decide to veto this legislation. It seems to be another case of Proposal A being passed at the last moment, and all of the subsequent problems that caused local assessing units. We will keep you advised on this matter.

Telecommunications Legislation: Legislation is moving forward in Lansing to severely restrict our rights to deal with telecommunication and cable providers. Unfortunately similar legislation is making its way through the U.S. Congress. Needless to say there has been a concerted effort on the part of telecommunication and cable providers to get this legislation passed. We continue to express our strong opposition to at least some of the provisions of the bill, but at a recent MML Legislative Committee meeting it was obvious that some legislation will pass and most likely will be signed into law.