Title
Agenda Questions for Council Meeting of 2/1/10
Memorandum
To: Mr. Roger Fraser, Administrator
Date: January 29, 2010
Mr. Fraser,
I have the following questions pertaining to items posted on the Agenda for the Council meeting of 2/1/10.
Agenda Item - DS-4: Resolution to Approve FY 2011 -2016 Capital Improvements Plan
Question: The project identified as "Compost Operations Expansion" details proposed expenditures of over $0.5 million between FY 2012 and FY2014. Staff estimates that resident yard waste deliveries to the Compost Operations Facility to remain constant at 9000 tons per year for the next 5 years. In 2007, yard waste deliveries to the facility totaled approximately 22,000 tons of which over half was delivered by contractors serving non-residents. Therefore,
1. Is the project "Compost Facility Expansion" proposed to serve an expected increase in yard waste deliveries to the facility by non-residents? Please explain the need for the project.
2. Is the project proposed to be funded in part or in whole by the City Solid Waste Levy (i.e. solid waste fund)? Please explain the proposed funding sources with emphasis on identifying any General fund and Solid Waste fund contributions.
3. What is the expected annual Ann Arbor public tax subsidy per ton to process yard waste delivered by non-residents? What year is the public tax subsidy expected to be retired from revenues generated by non-resident yard waste deliveries if this project is appropriated in FY 2011 as proposed? Is there a present public tax subsidy for the processing of non-resident yard waste deliveries? Please explain how a City operated "merchant" compost processing facility operation does not require a public tax subsidy from residents to process non-resident yard waste (include land, capital and the tax exempt status of the City).
4. Does the proposed facility expansion account for possible changes to the State landfill yard waste ban (i.e. Senate Bill 725) that would allow yard waste to be disposed of in landfills that have landfill gas energy generation?
5. Does the proposed facility expansion account for possible reductions in yard waste deliveries due to the possible diversion of yard waste to the rising and government supported bio-fuels industry?
6. The Administration is seeking to privatize the operations of the Compost Facility - has the Administration made any assurances to private for profit operators that the proposed expansion will occur? Please describe the nature and content of any communications between the Administration and any private operators seeking to be selected to operate the Compost Facility.
7. The Administration identifies Waste Management Incorporated as being responsible for the current delivery of merchant yard waste to the facility - has the Administration made any assurances to WMI that the proposed expansion will occur? Please describe the nature and content of any communications between the Administration and WMI about the proposed expansion and future rates to be charged for non-resident yard waste deliveries to the facility.
Question: The project identified as "800' Runway Safety Extension" is listed as "urgent" for FY 2011. In addition, approximately $1.4 million of outside funding is proposed. Therefore,
1. Please explain the nature of "urgency" for the Airport runway extension.
2. Will this project allow for heavier and larger aircraft to utilize the airport?
3. Will this project allow for an increase in frequency of flights by existing aircraft utilizing the airport, including aircraft that presently take off with weight limitations (i.e. fuel carrying limitations) at the airport?
4. Has this project been presented to the Pittsfield Township Board of Trustees and Planning Commission?
5. Is the primary source of outside funding from the Federal Government? If so, what are the ramifications to the City's control of airport operations if such funding is accepted? What are the City's obligations to the Federal Government if such funds are accepted?
Question: The project identified as "Model for Mobility: Fuller Road Station Phase 1 Design/Construction" is listed as "urgent" for FY 2011. In addition, $5,365,000 of funding is estimated to be appropriated from the Economic Development Fund where such funding does not presently exist. Therefore,
1. Please explain and identify why A). This project is urgent, and B). The source(s) of the proposed fund transfers to the Economic Development Fund. Do these proposed fund transfers include General funds? Do these proposed fund transfers include funds that are presently intended for mass transit (i.e. AATA)? Do these funds include funds presently in or proposed to be transferred to the Alternative Transportation fund? If so, are any of these proposed funds General funds?
2. Please identify if any funds presently existing (as of FY 2010) in the Economic Development Fund are proposed to fund this project? If so, are these funds "unobligated" and not necessary for Google Parking payments?
Question: The project identified as "Burton Road Improvements" is proposed for non-city funding for FY 2011. Therefore,
1. What is the status of the development project that is to provide this funding? Has the Site plan of the project that is the source of this funding expired? If not, when is it set to expire? Has it received an Administrative extension?
2. What is the status of any City funding for this project (I believe Council approved a contribution from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund)?
3. Is there a date upon which if this project does not begin construction, that this project will be proposed to be removed from the CIP?
Thank you for your diligence and time in addressing these questions.
Sincerely,
Stephen Kunselman,
Councilmember - Ward 3