HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-20-1983 Council Meeting Minutes 414
A Special meeting of the Canton City Council was held on
July 20th , 1983 in Canton High School for a Public Hearing .
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE OPENED THE MEETING FOLLOWED BY THE IN-
VOCATION GIVEN BY MAYOR EDWARDS .
Mayor Edwards asked for roll call at 6 : 30 p .m. Present :
Aldermen Kovachevich , Savill , Workman , Carl , May , Horr . Absent :
Aldermen Hammond , Sarff. A quorum was present .
PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING . Shall be the consideration
of the 1983 Amendment to the Canton Redevelopment Plan and
Redevelopment Project. This amendment includes a change in the
area by the inclusion of two blocks .
City Attorney Jim Malmgren reported that the mayor owns property
in the tax increment area . Alderman Carl appears to have an
interest in property in the tax increment area , with that in
mind Mr. Nebel and Jim Malmgren are of the opinion that the
mayor and Alderman Carl have a conflict of interest and this
point in time prior to starting the public hearing that they
excuse themselves from participating in debate , or the public
hearing , or in anyway voting upon any question . Mayor Edwards
excused himself and asked the clerk to call for a mayor pro-tem .
Alderman Savill nominated Alderman Kovachevich .
Motion by Alderman Workman , second by Alderman Savill that nomin-
ations be closed . Voice vote , motion carried .
Motion by Alderman Savill , second by Alderman May that Alderman
Kovachevich serve as Mayor Pro-tem for tonight ' s meeting . Voice
vote , motion carried .
The city ' s representatives gave comments . Jim Malmgren City
Attorney stated that he wanted to go over an overview of what
we feel the primary points of the proposed 1983 amendment are :
The pr8 osed amendment would seek to untarget the present tar-
geting pecific buildings for acquisition and destruction by
the city in the tax increment area .The proposed amendment con-
tains a first time inclusion of the power to construct new
sidewalks , lighting , landscaping and associated amenities ,
using tax increment funds for those purposes . The proposed
amendment includes a first time inclusion of the power to make
loans for rehabilitation purposes;the proposed amendment pro-
vides for the inclusion of underground utilities ;theproposed
amendment would abolish the cap on interest rates to be paid
on tax increment bonds . The proposed amendment would eliminate
the diversion of second avenue thru the Mathews Clinic . The
proposed amendment seeks to clarify the question of construction
of buildings into the middle of the street on the east and west
sides of the square , and would seek to provide for an orderly
process accomplishingmovement to the middle of the street . The
proposed amendment would include new blocks 18 and 41 in the
tax increment area . And the proposddlamendment would include
the ability to acquire real propery and to remove structures
without further amendment to include a re-determination that
check bottom *properties not now scheduled for acquisition should be acquired , or ,
need not be acquired. The amendment would include many other
of the page . matters which are set forth verbatimin the proposed amendment .
It does deal with traffic flow matters , and new public ways and I
will reserve that for the city engineer ' s comments .
In considering the public hearing it is not proposed or in-
tended that this special council meeting to take any final
action on the proposed amendment; and, at the conclusion of the
public heat g , I will request the council to continue the
hearing to Aty councilregularily scheduled meeting of September
20th , 1983 in the City Council Chambers , 210 E . Chestnut St . ,
Canton , Illinois .
Cliff Sagaser City Engineer Comments : Recorder could not re-
cord his statements .
Robert Molleck Police Chief Comments : Recorder could not re-
cord his statements .
* that others now scheduled for acquisition ,
415
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
Robert Derenzy Fire Chief Comments : Recorder could not record
his comments .
Jim Malmgren stated that the following documents are a part of
the record of this proceeding and are available for inspection
now and at all times during normal business hours at the city
building , prior to the proposed continuation of the public
hearing September 20th , 1983 .
1 . Canton State Bank letter of January 20th
1983 in opposition to the proposed amendment .
2 . Citizens Advisory Committee letter of March
1st , 1983 in support of the proposed Amend
ment .
3 . Fishermen ' s Club of the First Congregational
United Church of Christ letter dated March
�r 9th , 1983 in support of the proposed Amend-
ment .
Q 4 . The City of Canton ' s Planning & Zoning Co .
action of March 14th , 1983 in support of the
proposed amendment , those minutes are on file .
5 . Canton Works Managerial Retirees Club letter
dated April 9th , 1983 in support of the pro-
posed amendment .
6 . Canton Union School District #66 endorsement
of June 20th , 1983 proposed amendment , those
minutes are on file .
7 . A letter from Mary 1�". Rubia dated July 5th ,
1983 which expresses no opinion .
8 . Spurgeons letter July 11th , 1983 in opposition
to the proposed amendment .
9 . Hicksatomic Stations letter of July 14th 1983
which offers to sell certain real estate in
the tax increment area , but which expresses
no apparent opinion to the proposed amendment .
10. Fulton Square letter of July 18th , 1983 in
opposition to the proposed amendment to which
are attached the letters from Spurgeons dated
July 11th , 1983 and from the Canton State Bank
dated July 18th , 1983 all in opposition .
11 . Canton Park District letter of July 20th , 1983
which appears to be in favor or in the alternative
to take no position on the proposed amendment .
12 . A letter from Spoon River College Board of
Trustees dated July 7th , 1983 which takes no
position to the propsed amendment .
Additionally , although it was not a response to the proposed
1983 amendment the city was today advised the possibility of a
construction of a dual cinema in the tax increment area , and a
possibility of the city ' s acquisition of the Capitol and Garden
Theatres .
416
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
Public Hearing Comments made by the public :
Robert Beckner Sr. 1250 Sunview. I own a business at 71 E .
Side Square . Mr. and Mrs . Beckner want to go on record as
favoring the amendments to the redevelopment plan and project .
We feel its a step in the right direction . They ask customers
of his business what they thought of this plan ( they signed a
petition ) and only 2 did not want to get involved .
Nancy Elson 639 N . 2nd Avenue . Read the minutes of the School;
Board Meeting , they are as follows : Mayor Edwards , City Att-
orney Jim Malmgren , Cliff Sagaser City Engineer , were invited
to discuss the impact of the 1983 proposed amendment to the
Canton Redevelopment Plan and Project on District 66 . Mayor
Edwards spoke briefly and explained the reasons that brought
about this proposed amendment : 1 . The merchants do not seem
to be satisfied and the business climate is dropping . 2 . The
citizens asked that the traffic flow be reviewed . 3 . There is
a deteriorating tax base - last year tax increment funds were
$110 . 000 . 00 ; this year , $42 ,000 . 00 . City Attorney Malmgren
reviewed the area comprising the Enterprise Zone and stated block
18 and block 41 are being added . He explained that any material
amendment requires a public hearing and discussed further what
the plan involves and the flexibility that will be retained .
Superintendent Benson stated that he was glad to see something
happening to improve the city and expressed support of the
amendment . Derenzy moved that the board support the 1983
proposed amendment to the Canton Redevelopment Plan and Project .
All members voting in favor of.
Clarence W Phillips 44 White Court . A letter was written in
support of the proposed changes in the plan and the reasons for
such support , that letter is as follows : First and most impor-
tant is the fact that the changes in the plan should encourage
owners of downtown property to improve or replace their property ,
since the proposed changes in the plan remove , to a large degree ,
the hesitation to invest in a property which might be taken away
from the owner at any time , I believe this will let the tax
increment district function as it has in other states , with pro-
perty improvements producing increases in tax revenue to be used
for further development within the district , with increased mo-
mentum as time passes . Secondly , I believe our downtown has had
a flaw in it for over a century , the flaw being the mis-match
between the street on the east side of the square at its joining
with White Court. Prior to the tornado of 1975 , the century-old
building which housed Fredman Furniture made realignment of the
two streets impractical . When the "Downtown Plan " was being
developed, the Fredman building still existed . None of us in
Canton were alert enough to see the possibility of aligning these
streets after the Fredman Building was demolished , but Cliff
Sagaser was . There surely can be no doubt that increased traffic
onto the Square and increased sales tax revenue and real estate tax
income for the Tax Increment District will result from the proposed
changes . I wish to go on record as being fully in support of the
proposed changes .
William H . Malmgren 676 N . 6th Avenue . I am generally for the
proposed amendment and I ' ll tell you why , I want to be able to
get to one side of the square to another., I can go from East
to West , and I can go from North to South . I want to look
for some sense of mobility . I use to be comfortable about
coming to downtown Canton , I ' m not any more . I ' m bothered by it .
I ' m just not happy with the situation .
Charles E . Wright 531 S . 2nd Avenue . The State Statutes says to
present the plan to the planning commission and it has not been
presented . Under the old plan it says "this community develop-
ment plan may be modified at any time by the City of Canton
provided , however , that it be modified after the lease of sale of
417
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
real property in the project area , the modifiations must be in -
centive of the developers of such real property or in the very
necessities of interest of (.blank) of the proposed modifications . "
( I could not make out the rest of the comments ) . Mr. Wright
said he was not critical , he just wanted some answers . Another
thing he would like to see changed , is in the original plan and
also in the amended plan , and that is , the city pledging the
full faith and credit of the municipality and such obligations
are superior to full faith and credit to the municipality . The
ordinance authorizing the obligation to provide for the levy and
collection of the direct annual tax on all taxable property in
the municipality . The city officials pay principle interest on
the obligations as they mature . That ' s in the state law , the
city ordinance states nothing about how that should be done ,
by referendum or anything , where the state does . I would like
to see us ( blank ) or detail it in an ordinance to comply with
the state law.
Kai Nebel commented : He said he could not comment on' the first
�- part of Ordinance #523 because I haven ' t reviewed that . In
Ur reference to the plan , it picks up the language of the statute
Q which gives the city the power to issue bonds , it does not pro-
vide the issuance of the bonds themselves . If any action were
Q to be taken in reference to issuances of bonds , it would have to
be thru a bond ordinance . If any kind of bond ordinance were
drafted and submitted to the city council , which involved full
faith and credit , there is a provision in the statute which
enables there to be an referendum on the basis of petitions
being signed by members of the public . So at that time , citizens
of the community , if an adequate number of them asked for a
referendum, would have a referendum. That issue is not proposed
at this present time . I don ' t go to the mayor and settle it
one way or another , I 'm just mentioning it to you on how the
statute works .
Charlie Wright answered , that you need 10% of the voters in the
last presidential election to sign a petition . And since there
has been nothing said here , it would be very easy for the city
to go ahead and issue the tax without having a referendum.
Kai Neble answered , if you do that , there would be no bond
counsel in the world would approve tax exempt . Any bond would
have to have the opinion of bond counsel . Not one bond counsel
in the world would issue an opinion if the city council would
defy the statute , nobody would buy. that .
Harlan Crouch 263 W . Chestnut . I ' m a property owner on the west
side and the east side . For two years this administration has
been dscussing the downtown development issue . I participated
at committee to study the downtown , make recommendations and
worked some 6 months doing that . Recommendations were made by
the committee and those recommendations are making Chestnut St .
a two-way street between Main and Avenue A, and some minor
altercations for the type of uses available for the downtown
Area , but in general we planned the intent . I ' m concerned that
the issue has not been dealt with preferably by the council .
We now have a plan before us . I ' m concerned when I see us
acquire a building and sell that building for one dollar , be-
cause we say we don ' t believe that we should eleminate proper-
ties from the tax roll . But we turn around and develop a plan
that ' s going to remove 3 viable business ' s and demolish the
buildings . I ' m concerned with the inconsistency . How can we
pay substanial dollars to buy and demolish buildings so we can
widen the street at a cost of $160 ,000 . 00 that goes from no
where to no where . It seems like a substanial expenditure for
little benefit . There is no perfect plan . Lets not find per-
manent solutions to temporary problems .
John Barclay 142 N . 2nd Avenue . In the past I have objected
repeately against the original plan . I favor the new plan as
418
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
far as it goes , it could have gone a little further on
South Main Street.
William Cherry R. R. # 2 . I ' m handicapped , so what ever plan
you adopt , always remember the handicapped .
Carol Kuchan 396 South Avenue . The City of Canton has a
committment to the people who have a business here . She
supports the new redevelopment plan .
Vic Mason 345 S . Avenue B . I ' m here primarily as a citizen .
It cost $18 ,000 . 00 to sand blast his building , ( he purchased
it for $1 . 00 from the city) its a beautiful building . I like
the plan , and I ' m 100% for it .
Jack Yancick R. R. # 4 . I served on the original committee before
the 1975 tornado . No matter what this council does , no matter
what the citizens do , we have to do one thing , make a plan
flexible enough for it to be changed and paid for .
Walter Hauber 111 W. Locust St . I own two pieces of property
on the west side of the square , and I believe very much in this
plan .
Barbara Henderson no address given . I ' ve been a citizen for
45 years and am against any tearing down of the Jones Park .
I ' m also concerned about buildings being torn down .
Tim Tomasello 70 Aspen Drive . I am the manager of Spurgeons .
A committment was made with Fulton Square , the plan we have
now is a good plan .
Larry Sprague 32 N . Avenue C . The problem with the downtown
area , is not getting people downtown , its keeping them downtown .
I can go in the store at 5 minutes till 5 and I get the feeling
get the h--- out of here because I want to go home .
Norman Eldridge 644 S . 3rd . I ' m worried about having a fire ,
then everybody would rebuild in the street where would your ,
Fire protection and Police Protection be , as it is with this
plan it would even be worse . I feel sorry for you guys up
here tonight, because any way you go , your gonna be wrong . I
hope you ' ll make the right decisions .
Frances Steinkamp 432 N . lst . I just acquired a business , as I
have alot of faith in Canton people . Lets don ' t commit ourselves
to something we can ' t get out of.
Cathy Campbell 335 N . 14th . I do not shop in downtown Canton ,
it ' s like I ' m not wanted in their stores .
Bill Phillips 1465 E . Locust . We have obtained and reviewed
the available documents relating to the 1983 Amendment to City
Redevelopment Plan . In our opinion , the 1983 Amendment will
allow improved opportunity to meet the original goals of
elimination of conditions of blight and obsolescence and
encouragment of private investment in new commercial facilities
in the redevelopment area . We believe this for the following
reasons :
1 . The 1983 Amendment , page 4 item ( i ) calls for the
eventual repair or replacement of all sidewalks in
the Redevelopment Area . An inspection of the walks
show this is an admirable goal . The improvements are
definitely required .
2 . The 1983 Amendment , page 4 , item ( ii ) , calls for the
construction of a two way street between White Court
419
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
and First Avenue just south of the
proposed building shown in the 1983
Land use plan . We believe this street
will be an improvement to the Redevolpment
Area . The street will allow improved
vehicular circulation in the Redevelopment
Area . This street should create more willing-
ness by the citizens of Canton to venture into
the east side of the square . The street
should eliminate the existing bottleneck on
the east side of the square .
3 . The 1983 Amendment , page 4 , item ( 9l ) , seeks
construction of a new one way street at the
north end of Jones Park . This new street
should allow better vehicular access around
Jones Park . If done properly , the street
should not seriously affect the flow of ped-
estrians in the area . The street should
eliminate the existing bottleneck on the east
side of the Square . This street , too , should
Q create more willingness by the citizens of
Q Canton to venture into the west side of the
Square .
4 . The 1983 Amendment , page 4 , iten ( iii ) seeks
construction of a new tow way street along the
existing location of White Court . This two way
street was not possible until the demolition
of the former furniture store building located
at the southeast corner of the square . We be-
lieve this street will create a major new access
to existing and new business ' s in the Redevelop-
ment Area . We are part of a company which owns
a building that is proposed to be demolished to
allow the construction of the street . We have
no objection to relocating for this purpose .
5 . The 1983 Amendment , pages 4 ,5 , and 6 helps
eliminate the uncertainty of future development
in certain blocks . Property owners in blocks
19 , 20 , 21 , 31 , 32 , 37 , 40 , and 56 now know they
can make long term investments in their real
property .
6 . The 1983 Amendment , pages 4 ,5 , and 6 clarifies
and makes practical the requirement of property
owners on the east and west sides of the square
to build past the curb line . In fact , the
Amendment has requirments that make construction
past the curbline more difficult . This should
ease the minds of property owners and allow in-
vestment in upgrading of existing buildings .
7 . The 1983 Amendment , page 6 , deletes the limit
of 8% interest on bonds . This part of the
amendment should allow improved investment in
the redevelopment area .
Additionally , the 1983 Amendment has provisions for new green
areas in the Redevelopment area , provisions for better con-
cealment of utilities , and improved funding possiblities for
development .
In summary , we believe there are many facets of the 1983 Amend-
ment that will improve the value of real property in the Redevelop-
ment Area .
420
CONTINUED JULY 20TH , 1983
We support the 1983 Amendment and ask that it be adopted , with
modifications if necessary .
Harold Ellis 724 S . 1st Avenue . Could not understand his com-
ments . He was opposed to the new plan .
On September 20th , 1983 at 6 : 30 p .m. in Council Chambers at
City Hall this public hearing will reconvene . Motion by Ald-
erman Savill , second by Alderman Workman to adjourn the public
hearing . Voice vote , motion carried .
Motion by Alderman Workman , second by Alderman Horr to reconvene
in a regular session . Voice vote , motion carried .
Motion by Alderman Savill , second by Alderman Horr to adjourn .
Voice vote , motion carried . Council adjourned at 8 : 00 p .m.
CI NY CLERK
APPROVED
MAYOR