HomeMy WebLinkAboutORDINANCE 1486-1992
•
Suggested by: Finance
City of Kenai
ORDINANCE ~~/ • 1~~"92
•
•
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA AMENDING KMC
7.25.100 TO CLARIFY ALLOWABLE USES OF GENERlaiL FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
RESERVE MONIES.
WHEREAS, subsection (a) of KMC 7.25.100 imposes a limitation on the
use of Capital Improvement Reserve appropriations toward assessment
districts; and
WHEREAS, subsection (d) of the same code section contains language
that appears to conflict with, or at least dilute the limitation
imposed by, subsection (a); and
WHEREAS, subsection (a) could be interpreted to imply that assessments
should be at least S0~ of non-grant costs, which is not a City policy
and is further in conflict with Council's authority to set the
percentage of costs to be assessed provided by KMC 16.05.010 and
16.10.070.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA, that KMC 7.25.100 is hereby amended as follows:
7.25.100 Author__ized Use of Capital Im rovement Reserves:
Subject to the above provisions, and in addition to the
provisions of KMC 7.25.070(c) above, such monies may be
used at the discretion of Council:
(a) To provide municipal financing j(UP TO 50~ OF
THE COSTS IN EXCESS OF ANY STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS
SECURED)] ror capital improvement projects in an approved
assessment district with the balance of the necessary
financing to be apportioned to the benefitted properties
in accordance with the provisions of the Charter and the
ordinances enacted pursuant thereto;
(b) To use in lieu of bonding to provide for that
portion of financing of an approved assessment district to
be ultimately paid by owners of benefitted properties, with
such financing to be reimbursed from collections of
assessments or sales of land foreclosed for such collections
within said assessment district;
(c) To provide municipal financing for any projects
for which assessment districts are not authorized and for
which no state or federal grants are available;
(d) To provide the municipal share of financing for
projects for which state, federal, or state and federal
grants are available and to provide advance financing to
be refunded from such grants. (Ord. 793)
. ;,
. .. ,
i_ ._. .. .....,.Y _. .. ..
Ordinance No. 148b-92
Page Two
P1~SSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 20th day of
May, 1992.
Approved by Finance: C',~_
(4/22/92)
kl
Introduced: May 6, 1992
Adopted: May 20, 1992
Effective: June 20, 1992
;.
.:.
..
_.._
-- .<. ,v
t
17811881
CITY OF KEN~-I
"ail G' ~ ~4~~~„
_. Z'f0 FIDALQO KENAi, At.A$KA X11
TELEPHONE 369.7636
FAX 907.283.3014
MRKOP~ANWK •
T0: Kenai City Council
FROM: Charles A. Brown, Finance Director
~4Q
DATE: April 22, 1992
SUBJECT: KMC 7.25.iOO(a)
I have drafted an ordinance that amends KMC 7.25.1OO(a). That code
subsection contains a limitation on uses of the City's Capital
Improvement Reserve (C.I.R.). Subsection (a) discusses financing of
special assessment districts.
It's rather difficult to understand this without a flow chart, but
what it means is that the portion of the C.I.R. appropriation that is
of assessed can be no greater than 50~ of the project costs that are
not financed by grants. This is almost impossible to understand (at
least by me) without an example.
Let's assume that we want to form an assessment district financed by
the C.I.R. and that no grants are available.
Project costs $ 100,000
Grants ~ 0~
Costs in excess of grants 100 000
Maximum ~ not assessed ~ 50~
Maximum non-assessed costs
that can be financed by C.I.R. 50 0 0
In the above example, the maximum non-assessed costs are $50,000. It
follows then that the minimum assessed costs is the difference, or
$50,000. It is not the Council's policy to assess at 50$ of costs.
Furthermore, if some grant funds are used in the project, then the
rule in subsection (d) could be followed, which has no such 50~
limitation. This is illogical; it is confusing and contradictory.
My solution is to eliminate the limitation from subsection (A). The
City Attorney has reviewed this and agrees with the ordinance, but
feels that this is one of the most incomprehensible memos he's ever
read.
In case you are wondering, the reason we have not been in violation of
KMC 7.25.100 is that we have used at least some grant funds in avery
assessment district (using subsection (d) as the rule). However, we
no longer have any road grants. If we attempt to form an assessment
district that does not include grant money, subsection (a) will apply,
and it will be a problem if not amended.