Laserfiche WebLink
that area and the taxpayers would not be affected. <br />Mr. Otto - The Environmental Assessment is done through a consultant selection <br />process. Federal guidelines for the Assessment are_very detailed; it is <br />mandatory thata public hearing «i, .�.:f ;.�.J J...,'the Environmental <br />Assessment. `-- - 0� 4 r� bC� tXds - A -- <br />Chairman Ippel - With respect to obligating State funds - the only answer is <br />'no'. The State has criteria to be met and once those qualifications have been <br />met it is a matter of being put on a priority list. Keep in mind that these <br />funds are not general revenue funds; they are basically user taxes put upon <br />aircraft owners and airport operators and those funds are dedicated to airport <br />development. Nobody on this Cbamission would hope to see that airport became a <br />reality if the development ousts would be Ramsey's responsibility 100%. With <br />respect to locarien. here is not.a. location that would be to everyone's <br />satisfaction. The State has an ordinance addressing airport location, tne <br />'cornfield' ordinance. This airport study was to stay tne existing site only <br />Decause it already exists and is being used. With the exception of the homes <br />to the north, it is pretty well screened and situated in the middle of 1400 <br />acres of industrial property. <br />Cbumissioner Stauffer - Che of the meetings of this Ctmmission was dedicated to <br />looking at the economic benefits. The minutes of that meeting are public <br />record. <br />Commissioner Sieber - Can Ramsey afford an airport? Yes, if we want one. <br />Council and ultimately the citizens will make that decision. Is it wiser to <br />extend sewer and water rather than develop an airport to attract tax base? <br />That is not known. I guess that sewer and water will arse in anyway as sewer <br />and water always come into developing areas. Don't think it is a case of <br />airport sZ sewer and water; sewer will come either way. The airport may <br />retard or speed up the need for sewer and water. With respect to looking at <br />other sites, I have been in Ramsey 8 years and recall when the General Mills <br />property was being considered as an airport site; a lot of hot tempers got <br />consideration of that site stopped. The Gateway site is the only real viable <br />site in Ramsey. Will the facility be self-supporting? I don't think so but I <br />do think it will generate enough indirect revenue to offset the operation <br />costs. Overall, it will be a benefit to Ramsey and bring money into the City, <br />but economic benefit is not the only consideration. According to the City <br />Charter, Council makes the decision and it is this Commission's job to <br />recommend to Council whether or not the project is feasible and a good idea. <br />The airport issue would not be put to a referendum unless it is done by <br />ordinance, and it probably will be. If it is financed through G.O. bonds, it <br />will go to a referendum vote. Ultimately, the people will decide. Residential <br />property taxes will increase if additional commercial tax base isn't brought <br />into the City; the airport can spur that commercial development, but is an <br />airport the best way to spur that development. Do the people want to bring in <br />business or will it be an expensive bedroom community. Ramsey is in the middle <br />of a developing area and if we retard development, the cost of living will be <br />higher; that is the decision the people have to make. Do the people want <br />economic growth and do they want to accomplish it with an airport? <br />Mr. Babcock - 118 E. Main - Anoka - Am an attorney representing Max Schwartzman <br />August 21, 1985 <br />Page 7 of 14 <br />