Laserfiche WebLink
to a city but also that revenue that would have normally gone to the County and <br />school district. Without t~x increment assistance, this sewer and water <br />project in the Industrial area would cost property owners approximately <br />$6500/acre; with tax increment assistance, the project will cost property <br />owners $3600/acre. If it is determined the City can proceed with the project <br />even though bids were more than 10% above estimates, the additional costs will <br />be paid for with tax increment revenues. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka pointed out that there would be lateral service costs that <br />property owners would also be asssessed for. <br /> <br />Mr. Vevea - Stated that his private well and septic system are adequate and he <br />goes on record opposing the municipal sewer and water project. <br /> <br />Jerry Martin - 14021 Basalt - Stated that he assumes he is not affected by this <br />project until laterals are installled past his property. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka stated that Mr. Martin's property is proposed to be assessed for <br />sewer and water trunk lines. Mr. Raatikka stated that those businesses along <br />Azurite would be assessed for laterals in addition to trunks; lateral costs <br />will be approximately $i5.00/front foot. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin - Stated that he owns the property and did not receive any notices <br />from the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich presented an affidavit of mailing which reflects that Martin and <br />Vevea were mailed notices of the proposed project; doesn't know why those <br />parties did not receive the notices. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin- Stated he will not benefit from the project now or in the future. <br />Lot of the affected property owners in the area are experiencing a depressed <br />market; any additional costs to these business owners would be a hardship to <br />those that originally helped in developing Ramsey. Those that will benefit <br />from public utilities should pay for it. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that he is not an advocate for or against public utilities <br />but pointed out that this proposed project is being subsidized by more than 50% <br />of the cost of the improvements; can't be sure the property owners will be <br />offered a proposal like this again. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin - Stated that $3600/acre is a good price but the timing is bad. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox stated that on two different occasions when this case was <br />discussed by Council he asked the engineer if all property owners were notified <br />of the proposed project and the answer was '~es'; Darryl Fults informed Council <br />of other property owners that were not notified; Vevea sounded positive at the <br />public hearing and surprised by his statements tonight. Council viewed all the <br />facts and came up with what they thought would be the most acceptable to all <br />those involved; taking the tax increments derived increased values brought <br />about by Flintwood II and River's Bend, who paid for their own sewer and water <br />projects, to offset the cost of utilities to the Industrial area and the <br />revenue derived from the Industrial area improvements will enhance the entire <br />community. <br /> September 9, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 3 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />