REFERENDUM PETITION OF TREMONTON ORDINANCE 21-12
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
REFERENDUM PETITION OF TREMONTON ORDINANCE 21-12
PROPOSITION
INFORMATION PAMPHLET
Referendum for Ordinance 21-12
Tremonton CityTABLE OF CONTENTS ≡ Application for the proposed referendum ≡ Argument prepared by the sponsors of the proposed referendum ≡ Argument prepared by the City ≡ Initial fiscal impact and legal impact statement
Application for proposed referendum of Ordinance 21-12
Argument Prepared by the Sponsors of the Proposed Referendum No Argument was submitted by the sponsors of the proposed referendum.
FISCAL AND LEGAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Referendum Ordinance No. 21-12
Good Faith Estimate of the Fiscal and Legal Impact of Repealing Ordinance No. 21-12 (UCA 20A-7-602.5 (2) (a))
EXPLANATION
The City Council annexed the Rivers Edge Property by adopting Ordinance 21-11.
A concise With the annexation of this Property, the landowner has a vested right to submit and
receive municipal services and development permits in accordance and conditioned
explanation, not
upon the City and state’s laws. Repealing Ordinance 21-12 eliminates a specific
exceeding 100 words,
zoning for the Property but not a right to develop the Property, and the City loses its
(vii) of the estimated negotiated infrastructure improvements provided by the Developer, which are valued
fiscal impact, if any, if between $616,548 and $1,487,662. These negotiated infrastructure improvements
the law were are necessary for providing municipal services to the Property and other areas of the
repealed City.
FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATE
If Ordinance 21-12 is repealed, the
estimated fiscal impact is between
A dollar amount representing the total estimated fiscal $616,548 and $1,487,662 in negotiated
(i) infrastructure improvements otherwise
impact of repealing the law
provided by the Developer, which is
explained in greater detail below.
If repealing the law would increase or decrease taxes, a New development increases the
dollar amount representing the total estimated increase or amount of taxes that the City receives in
decrease for each type of tax that would be impacted by the the form of property taxes, sales taxes,
(ii) and energy taxes. It is unknown the
law’s repeal and a dollar amount representing the total
estimated increase or decrease in taxes that would result exact tax impacts associated with
from the law’s repeal repealing Ordinance 21-12.
If Ordinance 21-12 is repealed, it is
estimated that there could be an
increase of $722,542 in the principal
amount of public debt necessary for
secondary water infrastructure
If repealing the law would result in the issuance or a change associated with Service Area 9.
Ordinance 21-12 approves a
in the status of bonds, notes, or other debt instruments, a
(iii) development agreement where the
dollar amount representing the total estimated increase or Developer is obligated to front the costs
decrease in public debt that would result of secondary water infrastructure for
Service Area 9 with an estimated value
of $722,542. This service area is
comprised of the Rivers Edge Property,
Holmgren East, Garfield Estates, Fridal
Heights.If Ordinance 21-12 is repealed, the City
would likely need to install
infrastructure improvements with a
total estimated fiscal impact of up to
$1,487,662. The categories of
infrastructure improvements and the
percentage of the total $1,487,662 are
A listing of all sources of funding for the estimated costs that as follows: Stormwater at 20%; Parks
would be associated with the law’s repeal, showing each Space and Trail Improvements at 32%;
(iv) and Secondary Water Improvements at
source of funding and the percentage of total funding that
would be provided from each source 49%. The exact funding sources of
these infrastructure improvements are
unknown at present, which may include
impact fees, grants, reserves, or public
debt and will be determined based
upon the availability of these sources at
the time of acquiring or constructing
these infrastructure improvements.
If Ordinance 21-12 is repealed, the
estimated fiscal impact is between
A dollar amount representing the estimated costs or savings, $616,548 and $1,487,662 in
(v) if any, to state and local government entities if the law were infrastructure improvements otherwise
repealed provided by the Developer necessary
for municipal services to the Rivers Edge
Property and other areas of the City
(vi) LEGAL IMPACT ESTIMATE
The repeal of Ordinance 21-12 would likely result in the
Developer having fewer restrictions on the development of the
annexed land, because the restrictions on the development of
the annexed land that are to be imposed by Ordinance 21-12
would be void. Pursuant to UCA 10-9a-506, as the land will be
annexed into the City without a zoning designation, “all land
uses within the annexed territory shall be compatible with
surrounding uses within the municipality.” The uses compatible
with the surrounding annexed territory include all of the
following: mixed use, residential (including townhomes and
apartments), commercial and agricultural. As the annexed area
Any significant effects on a person’s
(A) will not have a zoning designation, UCA 10-9a-306 will likely
vested property rights have application. Specifically, “If a land use regulation does not
plainly restrict a land use application, the land use authority
shall interpret and apply the land use regulation to favor the
land use application.” Based on this, the likely outcome of the
repeal of Ordinance 21-12 will be the Developers choosing any
uses of their preference that are compatible with the
surrounding uses. The City will be bound by UCA 10-9a-506 and
10-9a-306, making the City unable to restrict density or have the
developer pay for negotiated infrastructure improvements
contained in Ordinance 21-12.
There would be impact on Ordinance 21-11, annexing the
property into the City limits. The land at issue in Ordinance 21-
Any significant effects on other laws or 12 is annexed into the City boundaries (with the Ordinance 21-
(B) 11), but would not have a zoning designation, which provides
ordinances
fewer restrictions on the uses available to the Developer.Any significant legal liability the City Not applicable
(C)
may incur
Repeal of Ordinance 21-12 would likely nullify and void the
Development Agreement entered into between the City and the
Developer, a part of which was an agreement by the Developer
to gift infrastructure improvements and front the costs for
regional city storm drain, a secondary water pump station, and
secondary water infrastructure. Absent a new Development
Agreement, Developer would no longer be contractually
Any other significant legal impact as obligated to fulfill the aforementioned obligations. If Ordinance
(D) determined by the budget officer and 21-12 is repealed, it is difficult to ascertain what the Developers
the legal counsel may do with the land at issue, but, at minimum, even in the
unlikely event the Developers chose to leave the land
unimproved, the City would still be required to complete the
secondary water infrastructure that Developers agreed to
finance in the Development Agreement to service other areas of
the City. The City would likely be required to bond for all of the
secondary water system improvements.
Other Information needed based on the findings of the analysis
(ii) If repealing the law is estimated to have a fiscal impact, the local budget officer shall
include a summary statement describing the fiscal impact.
(iii) If the estimated fiscal impact of repealing the law is highly variable or is otherwise difficult
to reasonably express in a summary statement, the local budget officer may include in the
summary statement a brief explanation that identifies those factors impacting the
variability or difficulty of the estimate.
Repealing Ordinance 21-12 eliminates the zoning for the Rivers Edge Property and the negotiated infrastructure improvements
provided by the Developer as required by a Development Agreement. The negotiated infrastructure improvements provided by the
Developer are estimated to have a fiscal impact valued between $616,548 and $1,487,662. The amount of $616,548 is the
estimated fiscal impact of the Developer gifting and installing infrastructure improvements to the City in the form of real property,
water shares, secondary water easements, trail improvements, etc.
The estimated fiscal impact between $616,549 and $1,487,662 is the infrastructure improvements that are system infrastructure
improvements and have a variable fiscal impact based upon several factors. Under the Rivers Edge Development Agreement, the
Developers bear the financial risk of installing infrastructure improvements that are categorized as system improvements (for
stormwater and secondary water), with the City reimbursing the Developer through impact fees. More specifically, the Developer’s
financial risk includes advancing the funds to construct system infrastructure improvements anticipating that the Developer will
selling sufficient dwelling units to be able to get reimbursed from impact fees within a ten-year period (the reimbursement term
identified in the agreement). The City is only allowed to collect impact fees to pay for system improvements, and the City is
obligated to reimburse the Developer with impact fees when Developers install system improvements (See Utah Code 11-36a-402
(2) and Tremonton City Ordinance No. 21-10 Section 4.6 Use of Impact Fees).
If Ordinance 21-12 is repealed, the Developer will still have a right to develop their Property as explained in the legal impact analysis
above but is no longer obligated to gift and install infrastructure improvements with an estimated value of $616,548. Additionally,
the Developer is no longer obligated to bear the financial risk associated with system infrastructure improvements for stormwater
and secondary improvements with a fiscal impact estimated between $616,549 and $1,487,662. These system infrastructure
improvements are needed to provide municipal services to the Rivers Edge Subdivision and other areas of the City. Consequently,
the City would become financially obligated for the otherwise gifted infrastructure improvements totaling $616,548 and installing
these system infrastructure improvements with an estimated fiscal impact between $616,549 and $1,487,662. The ultimate
financing source for these system infrastructure improvements is impact fees; however, these infrastructure improvements must be
constructed before building permits can be issued and impact fees collected. If the City does not have sufficient impact fees whenthese improvements need to be constructed, the City would have to use other financing sources, which may include grants, existing reserves within the storm drain or water fund, or issue revenue bonds (public debt). The estimated fiscal impact is variable because it is unknown at present which of these financing sources (impact fees, grants, reserves, or public debt) would be used and will be determined based upon the availability of these sources at the time of constructing these system infrastructure improvements. For example, if public debt is determined to be needed for the secondary water system, the City would need to pledge revenues from the water fund and would likely need to increase water rates to cover the new debt payments for fifteen years (the anticipated term of the bond). Ultimately, the City will be reimbursed for installing system infrastructure improvements from impact fees, but the City will likely need to use other financing sources to pay for the upfront costs of these improvements. Prepared by: Dustin Ericson – Tremonton City Attorney Shawn Warnke – Tremonton City Budget Officer
“REFERENDUM PETITION OF ORDINANCE 21-12
To the Honorable Linsey Nessen, Tremonton City Recorder:
We, the undersigned citizens of Utah, respectfully order that Ordinance No. 21-12 (CREATING A NEW ZONE DISTRICT CALLED THE RIVERS EDGE OVERLAY ZONE (REOZ)
AND APPROVING THE REZONING AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 135.51 ACRES FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT R1-10 AND MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT TO AN
UNDERLYING ZONE DISTRICT OF MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT AND AN OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT OF THE RIVERS EDGE OVERLAY ZONE (REOZ) AND APPROVING THE RIVERS
EDGE PRE-ANNEXATION AND MASTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT), passed by the Tremonton City Council be referred to the voters for their approval or rejection at
the regular general election to be held on November 8, 2022.
For Registered Voter’s Printed Name (must be Signature of Registered Voter Date Signed
Office legible to be counted)
Use
Only
Street Address, City, Zip Code Email of Registered Voter (optional, to Birth Date or
receive additional information) Age (Optional)
By signing this petition, you are stating that you have read and understand the law this petition
seeks to overturn.
For Registered Voter’s Printed Name (must be Signature of Registered Voter Date Signed
Office legible to be counted)
Use
Only
Street Address, City, Zip Code Email of Registered Voter (optional, to Birth Date or
receive additional information) Age (Optional)
By signing this petition, you are stating that you have read and understand the law this petition
seeks to overturn.
WARNING: It is a class A misdemeanor for an individual to sign a referendum petition with any other name than the individual's own name, or to knowingly sign the individual's name more than once for
the same measure, or to sign a referendum petition when the individual knows that the individual is not a registered voter and knows that the individual does not intend to become registered to vote before the
certification of the petition names by the county clerk." (Utah Code § 20A-7-603)
*Birth date or age information is not required, but it may be used to verify your identity with voter registration records. If you choose not to provide it, your signature may not be verified as a valid signature if
you change your address before petition signatures are verified or if the information you provide does not match your voter registration records.VERIFICATION OF SIGNATURE COLLECTOR
State of Utah
County of Box Elder
I, ___________________________________, of _______________________________________________ hereby state under penalty of
perjury, that:
(Print Petition Circulator’s Name) (Print Circulator’s Address)
• I am a resident of Utah and am at least 18 years old;
• All the names that appear in this referendum packet were signed by individuals who professed to be the individuals whose names appear in
it, and each of the individuals signed the individual’s name on it in my presence;
• I did not knowingly make a misrepresentation of fact concerning the law this petition seeks to overturn;
• I believe that each individual has printed and signed the individual’s name and written the individual’s post office address and residence
correctly, that each signer has read and understands the law that the referendum seeks to overturn, and that each signer is registered to
vote in Utah or intends to become registered to vote before the certification of the petition names by the county clerk;
• Each individual who signed the packet wrote the correct date of signature next to the individual’s name;
• I have not paid or given anything of value to any individual who signed this petition to encourage that individual to sign it.
_____________________________________________________ _____________________________________
Petition Circulator’s Signature Date
_____________________________________________________ _____________________________________
Petition Circulator’s Residence Address (required) Petition Circulator’s Phone Number (optional)You can also read
