SALEM — The residential committee recently discussed how the members of city council and Salem administrators can best promote the upcoming street and sidewalk levy renewal.

Committee Chairman Evan Newman said that he had spoken with several city officials who have emphasized the importance of the .25% income tax levy last approved by voters in 2019 in funding municipal improvements and employer recruitment; however, he has also spoken with city residents who have expressed frustration that while streets have been improved, sidewalks have not, and are unsure they will support a renewal as a result. As a result, Newman wanted to discuss what could be done to promote the levy prior to the spring primary when the city is expected to seek its renewal.

Councilman Jeff Stockman suggested that a full list of the projects enabled by levy funding should be compiled and published to show that the city has been using the levy funding responsibly for the benefit of residents and to develop a list of the paving projects planned for the next three years to show how the funding would be used.

“As a taxpayer with increased expenses I have difficulty approving a renewal blindly, but if that money is stratified out for three years to show me how it’s going to be used that’s much easier to approve,” said Stockman.

City Service Safety Director Joe Cappuzzello said that he already had spreadsheets documenting when each paving project was completed, and that while typically the city evaluates what roads are most in need of repair on an annual basis rather than forecasting out several years in advance, they could instead outline several years as suggested. Cappuzzello also noted that such a plan could also incentivize voter support if the street they live on or use frequently was slated for paving during the next term of the levy.

When asked if there were currently plans for replacing sidewalks with levy funding, Cappuzzello said that historically the city has prioritized street paving, but that the city had received a $400,000 grant for planning sidewalk repairs and identifying which sidewalks were most in need of repair and the estimated costs of doing so. Cappuzzello also noted that if the levy were not renewed, street maintenance would only have roughly a third of its current funding, leaving only enough funding for patching rather than the current annual paving projects due to cost increased at every level between asphalt, fuel, and labor.

Mayor Cyndi Baronzzi Dickey also clarified that the sidewalks meant to be improved by the levy were those on public property. Dickey explained that while sidewalks are the city’s right of way, they are technically private property and the responsibility of homeowners by ordinance, and as a result making improvements to them with public funds can be problematic.

“Using those public funds to make improvements to private property becomes a difficult issue, because you have property owners saying why did you fix their sidewalks and not mine,” said Dickey.

Stockman and Councilmembers Andrew Null and Jayne Bricker all argued that there should be an effort to educate residents about the fact sidewalks are technically private property as many are unaware, with Stockman noting that even he was unaware.

Dickey also said that when discussing the broadcast channel, the city uses for city council meetings with Spectrum, she had been informed that the city could use the channel outside of the time slot and broadcast whatever it wanted on the channel 24/7. She suggested filming an open forum where city officials and guests can discuss the levy and take community questions, which could then be broadcast on that channel for the community’s benefit.

Null ultimately suggested that a special citizen-government committee similar to the one formed to plan the Lincoln Plaza project be formed to promote and educate residents about the levy. The committee ultimately voted unanimously to forward a request to form the committee to the city council for review.

In the city council meeting following the committee meeting Newman ultimately made a motion to form a committee comprised currently of himself, Bricker, Cappuzzello, and Councilwoman Sara Baer, with public participants to be selected later, which was unanimously approved. City Law Director Brooke Zellers reminded council that as it was not an official committee of the city council, it was subject to all the same Sunshine Laws.

Also discussed was a frequently asked questions sheet for the city’s Community Reinvestment Act to be uploaded to the city’s website. Newman said that he had compiled the graphic to help residents and potential developers understand the abatements available in collaboration with City Planning and Zoning Officer Chip Hank, and that it should be posted to the city’s website under the planning and zoning section.

“Really it covers what it is, where it is, who qualifies, it has some smart links in there we will update as [Hank] finishes updating the map, and it has the details of what abatements are available in the pre and the post 1994 CRA,” said Newman.