Dear Kimball residents and taxpayers: This letter is being written in regard to the recent flyer that was distributed concerning the future of Kimball City hall. The flyer stated that there are many myths regarding information “on the street.” The city council would first like to state that we do not feel all of the information on that sheet was factual and that these myths have not come directly from the council. Please remember that there are two sides to every story. The city council encourages you to attend meetings to hear the city’s side of the story. Following is some information that will help clear up the confusion. First myth, the City of Kimball can sell the current city hall to anyone who would like to buy it. In regards to grants, any non-profit organization can apply for grants which they may or may not receive. The city can try to qualify for grants, but would still need to raise matching funds. Where would those matching funds come from? As for the second myth, the $1.5 million cost of renovating city hall is very real and is documented for anyone to review. A task force was assembled in 1998 after a city hall rearrangement left the library with only 800 square feet of space. The library was already looking to increase space to accomodate growing circulation at that time. The task force chose from among four different plans and presented its decision to the city council and to the public. The information was presented to the city council on May 21, 2001, and to the public May 22. As for the potential decrease in cost with other plans, yes, the price will be less if the city does not build a public works/police garage. But then where will the city store its equipment? The plan fails to take into account the rental space and cost to house city hall and the library during construction. Another interesting fact shows that a 5 percent annual increase will be needed if the project is to be completed in phases. We will allow you to do the math In 2001, the cost of the project would have been $1.5 million. Three years later, nothing has been done and it would take another four years to complete the project if started now. The city council would like to ask why the previous council did not move forward when the project was first presented in 2001? The building would have been nearly finished by now. Was there no money, or no support? To address the fourth and fifth myths, it would most likely cost less than $1.5 million to purchase St. John’s. We also believe that the city could build a new building with very nice amenities for $1 million. There is currently room to build out at the fire hall. Another fact is that the fire hall currently has a lot of what we will need or want in a new building. We would not need to build or add a kitchen area, handicap restrooms, large meeting area or parking. Additional space would be needed for staff, the library, and garage space for public works and the police department. It may also be possible to add offices that could be rented to townships or other small businesses. As for the seventh myth, the city council has never stated that the city has the money to buy or repair the current city hall. We find it very interesting that no money has been budgeted to repair or maintain the current building in the past. So we ask you this, why has this become such an issue now that this council is looking at options? We ask you to inquire where the money from the sale of the municipal liquor store has gone and why that was not used to maintain the current city hall. The current council has a year-and-a-half under its belt, and operated under a budget set by the previous council for the first year. Yet we are now being criticized for sending out a survey to make future plans. As elected officials, it is part of our job to take responsibility for buying or building a new building. We are asked to look out for the future needs of the community and, just as any council, have the power to budget repairs to maintain current buildings. The decision-making power of the council in this matter depends on how the building will be paid for. If it is purchased contract-for-deed or through a lease, the city council is not required to have a public hearing or vote on the issue. We, as a council, know that taxes are an issue in this community. Please remember that council members are also tax-paying residents and are not happy about having high taxes. Mayor Karla Davis points out that one of the reasons she ran for mayor was because she wanted to see accountability for where tax dollars go in our town. If you review your tax statement you will notice that the city portion of your taxes were reduced last year. The council cut taxes by approximately $18,000. The council recently sent out a survey to find out how the community feels about the city hall issue. We know it was difficult to answer the questions without knowing the costs, but we felt the surveys would at least point us in the direction of what the community wants. The surveys were a way of getting public input without spending a lot of money to have each option reviewed by contractors or engineers. After reviewing the surveys, the council will be able to make a better decision as to which direction the community wants this council to go. We invite and encourage you to review the important information in the study presented to the public in 2001. The council would then like you to ask yourself this question: Why would the council or historical group go back to square one on a project when a study has been done, and time and money have already been spent on plans? We encourage you to attend our meetings and hear what is truly happening at the council table. Sincerely, Mayor Karla Davis and Kimball City Council: Andy Maus, Dwayne Orbeck, Micky Fischer, Steve Edwards.
