The resolution to move forward with repaving of the School Street parking lot was on the table during City Council’s business meeting Monday at City Hall.
“The street is in poor condition and my suggestion is that we continue to move forward,” said City Manager Jason Molino. “If it deteriorates even further, then we would be looking at not just repaving, but rebuilding the whole parking lot, which would cost significantly more.”
“I believe the $30,000 could be better spent elsewhere or saved,” said Jim Rosenbeck. “We should invest in neighborhoods, streets, sidewalks, that’s where the focus should be.”
Lisa Whitehead thinks the money could be better spent on other city projects as well.
“Let’s use the money to improve and beautify Batavia in a better way, improve our sidewalks and our streets, all Batavians use those,” Whitehead said. "We can clean up the condemned houses that are in foreclosure.”
Both Rosenbeck and Whitehead are Libertarian candidates for City Council.
Molino explained that the money comes from a grant by the New York Main Street Program and can only be used within the boundaries of the program, primarily between Center and Liberty streets.
”The money cannot be used outside those boundaries and it can only be used for streetscape improvements in that area,” Molino said.
The Batavia City Council unanimously agreed to pass the resolution to approve the transfer of $30,000 to the General Fund Parking Lots Budget. The issue of construction of a dumpster enclosure has been shelved for now.
For the record my comments
For the record my comments at City Council Monday evening:
My name is Jim Rosenbeck. I live at 13 Lewis Avenue. Thank you for the opportunity to address council.
I would like to comment on the resolution before you to allocate 30K to repave the Center Street Parking lot.
As I view it, the only difference between this proposal and the dumpster enclosure resolution you defeated in August is the fact that this one does not include the use of VLT revenues from Batavia Downs.
In August, you said that VLT money could be better spent elsewhere or saved.
The 30 thousand dollars you vote on today could also be better spent elsewhere or saved.
I don't believe the availability of 25 thousand dollars in grant money from BDC should be a factor in your decision.
The resolution before you doesn't mention dumpster enclosures. But we would probably agree that the reason for milling and repaving the parking lot at this time is to prepare that property for a dumpster enclosure.
There is no real urgency about the parking lot. The urgency is about the grant money. If Council members believe in investing 55 thousand local and state dollars in a dumpster enclosure, that is what council should be voting on.
If you vote yes on this resolution, know that you are setting a precedent for financing Caddilac style dumpster enclosures on city properties.
This would become the new standard when the next parking lot needs a dumpster enclosure ...even though BDC won't be there with a 25thousand dollar subsidy?
In closing I ask that council vote no on this proposal. I ask that you consider directing the city manager to develop a long term plan for the future funding and regular maintenance of dumpster enclosures throughout the city. Those enclosures should be more modest and less expensive.
Fees collected from private businesses who locate their dumpsters on city property should be earmarked for dumpster enclosures and maintenance. Better yet, figure out a way to turn the dumpster enclosure business over to the private users who utilize the dumpsters.
We have bigger priorities. Lets focus on the houses, neighborhoods, repairing the streets, the curbs and the sidewalks. Grants for dumpster enclosures misses the mark.
Thank you.
If the city can't find
If the city can't find anything better to do with the grant money than build a pretty fence for a bunch of dumpsters, then the right thing to do would be to return it.
Dave that is an option. The
Dave that is an option. The City Code states that dumpsters on City owned land must be enclosed. They are on the two other City owned properties that have dumpsters. And the code states the businesses that own the dumpsters have to pay the cost.
Grant money is our tax money. If you get a grant, that tells you they took too much in taxes to start. While most of us would agree that the excess taxes should never have been taken, they were. Giving our tax money back is not a smart option, as our money will then be given to someone else. I want our money back, I do not want someone else to get it.
This $25,000 in grant money can be used only for a very limited number of things and only in a very small area of the City. The low bid for enclosure recommended was $35,000, using the grant money. The Council said other $10,000 must not come from the City taxpayer. So unless the owners o0f the dumpsters can find $10,000 some other place, they have to pay for it. Give the grant money back, you still the dumpsters enclosed, but it will not look as good as recommended, and somebody else gets our $25,000.
As for Jim's idea of the City funding and maintaining enclosures throughout the City, why should we pay for enclosures on private property, were the vast majority of them are? The City has no business taking care of dumpsters on private property.
Jim also failed to mention that at the same meeting , the City voted to spend $251,000 on side walk repair, a quarter of a million dollars.
When you look at that money being spent on sidewalks, the $30,000 for paving a City owned parking lot is reasonable. Go over to Center and School Streets, across from Batavia Optical, and park there. Take a good look and you will see why it needs to be repaired. Jim also failed to mention that if this section is not fixed now, it will cost a lot more in 2015 when it was originally scheduled. Delayed maintenance never works out. Like that old commercial said, "Pay me now, or pay me latter". And in this case, latter will cost more.
There is another option suggested by some, privatize the City parking lots and let people pay to park there. Then the lot owner can negotiate with the dumpster owners and they would have to take care of the lot maintenance.
Molino explained that the
Molino explained that the money comes from a grant by the New York Main Street Program and can only be used within the boundaries of the program, primarily between Center and Liberty streets.
If this is a New York Main Street grant is seems like a pretty narrow area of one block between Center and Liberty...That doesn't seem like Main Street to me...Who made this such a narrow area..I agree there are other areas of the city that could use 30000 dollars of improvement..Ex how about brighter street lights on Main Street......Who uses this parking lot....I have been by there many times during the day and no one is parked there..Expand this to the entire downtown area and there would be many other options on how to better use 30,000 dollars....Why no one on council questioned Malino on what other areas could that money been used on...Find it hard to believe it was only for a one block area of downtown,for a space that no one uses anyway..Seems like council like 9-0 votes..No independent thinkers in that group..
I stand with my above
I stand with my above comment. When you accept state money, typically it comes with conditions. If it is our money, then why should there be conditions applied? Either it is or it is not. It's money seized immorally by the corrupt state government and then they want to dictate how it is spent. May not be much if anything we can do about it, but that does not make it OK and the controllers shouldn't get away with it so easily. The city council should stand up and demand that this money belongs to the citizens of Batavia and we will decide where best to spend it, and I don't believe a majority of Batavians think dumpster enclosures are anything more than putting lipstick on the proverbial pig. Rolling over and playing along is not leadership. Standing up for what's right may not be "smart" to Mr. Roach, but I'll take it every time.
Mark, The reason for the
Mark,
The reason for the narrow area for the $30,000 was that it was for paving of City owned parking lots. The City parking lots are downtown. The grant money for the enclosure and the money for paving are from two separate funds and not related.
Dave,
Morally, your are right, no argument. Who knows, maybe someday excessive taxation will stop. And while you send our money back to make your point, our money will be given away to someone else. It's our money and I want it back, one way or the other.
And without the $25,000, the owners will still have to pay to have the dumpsters enclosed. Earlier this year I asked for the enclosure to be done, long before the grant money was available, so while the grant money will make it look better, I don't really care, just get it done and follow the City Code.
The other, separate, point missed here is that the City owned lots still need to be maintained just like the rest or our infrastructure, like the streets and walks. How would you get the money to pave the lots? Would you want to sell and privatize the lots?. Would you want to charge for parking, like in Buffalo? Or just let the lots deteriorate?
As for the targeted area....
As for the targeted area.... center and liberty aren't the only ones qualified... straight from http://www.nyshcr.org/Programs/NYMainStreet/
Eligible Target Areas
The Project( s ) must be located in an eligible target area. An eligible target area shall mean an area: (i) that has experienced sustained physical deterioration, decay, neglect, or disinvestment; (ii) has a number of substandard buildings or vacant residential or commercial units; and (iii) in which more than fifty percent of the residents are persons of low income, or which is designated by a state or federal agency to be eligible for a community or economic development program.
Seems that the center/liberty area isn't really a good fit for their "target" area definitions nor the only area that fits.