1 / 16

Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Management District

Our Goal this evening? To Hear From You. This is your opportunity to ask questions, express concerns, give opinions for or against, and make suggestions. . Lake Maintenance Donations. 2000> $3,0002001> $3,0002002> $3,0002003 $ 2,9502004 3,0102005 16,201*(Aquathol - $100,000)2006 9,610*2007 12,290**2008 20,376**(Sonar - $150,000) .

myrrh
Download Presentation

Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Management District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Management District Special Meeting of the Glen Lake Protective Association, August 21, 2008, Town of Queensbury Center

    2. Our Goal this evening? To Hear From You This is your opportunity to ask questions, express concerns, give opinions for or against, and make suggestions.

    3. Lake Maintenance Donations 2000 > $3,000 2001 > $3,000 2002 > $3,000 2003 $ 2,950 2004 3,010 2005 16,201* (Aquathol - $100,000) 2006 9,610* 2007 12,290** 2008 20,376** (Sonar - $150,000)

    4. How did we pay for it?

    5. How did we pay for it? Aquathol (control pondweed) – Town of Queensbury contributed $50,000, including a $15,000 donation from the Great Escape. In addition, we received a $16,000 grant from the NYS Invasive Species Grant. 2/3rd of funding from outside

    6. How did we pay for it? Sonar (control milfoil) – Town of Queensbury contributed $75,000. 2008 NYS Invasive Species Grant application has not been released and is not a predictable source of funding. ˝ of funding from outside GLPA raised $34,000 from intensive fund raising. 1/3rd of households did NOT contribute.

    7. The Future of Glen Lake - Nuisance aquatic vegetation can not be totally eradicated. The plants will grow back and new species are on the way. - Ongoing management will be needed. - It has been estimated that every three to five years a maintenance program costing approximately $100,00 to $200,000 will be needed.

    8. Our Options Continue present course and hope that outside funding will be available to supplement our Lake Maintenance contributions. Form a Taxing District. other?

    9. The Present Course Annual voluntary fundraising would need to increase substantially. [approx $35k per year] Grant opportunities would be sought but few are presently available. Town, County, and State would continue to be asked for funds.

    10. Aquatic Plant Management Taxing District BENEFITS All households that benefit from access to Glen Lake would contribute to lake maintenance A consistent source of funding would be available Long-term, proactive management could be implemented instead of crisis management All monies collected for the district MUST be used in the district for aquatic management

    11. Aquatic Plant Management Taxing District DISADVANTAGES Queensbury Town Board would have ultimate authority over the district, although the GLPA could have an advisory role. Although such a district would give broad authority to management the lake and its watershed, it would not provide funding for non-water quality issues. For example, repairs to the dam, insurance costs, mailings or other association activities could not be paid for from this tax.

    12. Aquatic Plant Management Taxing District HOW TO FORM Town Board makes a resolution to start the process Map, Plan, and Report would be prepared. properties included in district statement of purposes of the improvement district statement of tax rate and method of taxation (by assessment or benefit based) explanation of Town access to take needed action at completion, there is a 30 day referendum period for comments cost of $10,000 to $15,000 would come from town, but would be repaid by the district if formation is successful. Public hearing is held. Order establishing district is given if there is a consensus, or if there is enough organized dissent, a voting referendum would take place.

    13. Taxation Types Ad valorem – based on assessed value. A percentage rate would be established based upon management projects and households would be taxed based upon the assessed value. [for example, $.50/1000 of assessed value; at $300k assessment = $150 tax] Benefit-based – tax based upon benefit. This tax could set a flat rate for every household (all pay same), or it could set different unit rates based upon differing benefits. [for example, $150 per household tax for all, or could decide lake front should pay more than lake access, etc.]

    14. NO TAX CAP IS POSSIBLE! However, annual project budget recommendations by the GLPA could be approved by members and long-term management plans could be created to distribute costs over a number of years. Also, the Map, Plan, and Report would state the estimated maximum cost of improvement and give a “cost to the typical property” estimate.

    15. Town involvement Town cannot be taxed by ad valorem taxation Town could be included in a benefit-based tax method Town could enter into a “Contract For Services” agreement with the GLPA. This would require an annual contract.

    16. What you said. Survey Results 163 returned surveys out of approx 300 households [54% return] 122 [75%] favored the creation of a tax district 77 [63%] favored taxation by lot (same for all) 45 [37%] favored ad valorem taxation 41 [25%] were opposed to the tax district

    17. Questions, Statements, Concerns, Considerations Please come forward and be heard

More Related