Committee discusses rail spur project funds

On August 21, the Economic Development Committee held a joint meeting with City Council to discuss the economic development plan and what to do with the funds that had been purposed for the no longer feasible rail spur project.

Back in April, a public meeting was held in order to hear input pertaining to the .4 percent tax and whether or not it should still be collected. Only two members of the public attended the meeting in April and the proposed amendment would allow the tax to continue to be collected in order to fund future economic development projects.

At the August 21 meeting, discussion about how the funds should be used came up once more. The suggestion was made by economic development committee member Christy Warner that the funds be used to pay for sidewalks.

“Instead of charging the homeowners for the sidewalks why can’t we use their money to work with them?” Christy Warner said.

City Economic Development Director Wilson Bowling, commented that that could be possible. City Councilwoman Ann Warner suggested a street renovation with the funds.

“Well why don’t we use the funds to fix up the streets? They need fixing and if that’s what the funds are going towards then at least the community will see where the money is going,” Ann Warner said.

The only problem with Ann Warner’s suggestion being that economic development funds cannot be used to pay the city. This fact was brought to the attention of the committee and the city council by Deputy City Attorney Hoesing.

“These funds would have to be used for a qualifying business, a business in the community. The city cannot use the funds to pay themselves back for something such as the road development. Unless the projects that are being done are for the economic development of the city, something like attracting business,” Hoesing said.

The funds in question could potentially be used to take infrastructure out closer to I-80 in an effort to attract companies to come to Kimball to build and plant their businesses. The way the money could be used for a road is if that road was being put in for a business that was going to need it for access.

“I don’t think that using the funds for roads is enough of a benefit to the community. Yes, it’s something that should be addressed, but not with these funds. We need to figure out some way to really benefit the community. They trusted us that we were going to bring in a lot of opportunity with this money, and it didn’t work out. We need to be smart and show the voters and the people that, while we may have made a mistake, we can right it,” Councilwoman Kim Christensen said.

That being said the idea was toyed with of perhaps just letting the tax be collected until an opportunity arose that called for the funds.

“Right now, we don’t have any projects lined up. We don’t have a good solid plan that will benefit the development of our community. We shouldn’t try to force a plan to fit the funds we have at the moment,” Christensen said.

The problem faced by the city is whether or not to allow a ballot item to appear that would afford the citizen the opportunity to vote for a new project with the rail spur funds. Unfortunately, that could wind up being a problem.

“If the voters do vote ‘no’ when presented with a project, then the funds will remain bonded to the rail spur. This will leave you in the same position you’re in now where you have this money but you cannot use it,” Hoesing said.

Some debate progressed concerning whether or not the option to stop collecting the tax should be presented to the public. The point was made that voters, at times, vote based on emotion rather than logical thinking.

“I think that if you say stop the tax, they’ll vote to stop it because of the history they have with the subject. However, if you present the public with a viable alternative that will allow the funds to be used in a productive way, I believe the public will choose that,” Economic Development Committee Chair Roger Wynne said.

Ann Warner stated that she felt the citizens are smart enough that they can determine what is best for their community.

“If they are presented with an option that brings something to their community that will help it grow, I believe they’ll choose that. They want to see this money going toward something beneficial for the community,” A. Warner said.

Josh Enevoldsen, economic development committee member, suggested that the tax should continue to be collected until a more beneficial project can be found.

A motion was made to recommend to the city council to keep the tax as is until a viable project presents itself. The motion was passed with all ayes.

The city council meeting which followed proved that they would indeed allow the tax to remain the same, taking the recommendation to wait from the economic development committee.