Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Reimann stated that the purpose for bringing in the improvements is to <br />promote development; a twenty year deferment/10 year payment plan might delay <br />development. <br /> <br />Mr. Steve Gorecki noted that the backup data to the options goes with a 4% cost <br />construction index; presented Council with the cost construction indexing for <br />the last 25 years; from 1975 to 1985 the average construction cost index was <br />8.6%. Stated another concern is that those on Azurite will be assessed for <br />sewer and water trunk; water laterals will not be available to those on Azurite <br />and to hook up will mean an another assessment for laterals. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that water laterals were not planned for that area at this <br />time; they can be added to the proposed project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox suggested that maybe the possibility of paying for those <br />water laterals with tax increments funds or landfill trust fund money be <br />considered. <br /> <br />Mr. Steve Gorecki - Stated that the area south of the landfill in in a <br />predicament; that he would like to see funding come from the source responsible <br />for the contamination and forcing the water to be brought in from so far away. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann replied that the well placement was determined as a result of a <br />recommendation not to be too close to the landfill because the drawdown creates <br />a potential for contamination; the extra distance is because of landfill <br />location and not existing contamination; that extra distance is a spin-off cost <br />to the area property owners. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox suggested that Council decide on a specific proposal as the <br />60 day clock is running and the property owners deserve to know the exact <br />proposal and be able to determine if they are opposed or in favor of it. <br /> <br />Mr. Bernie Vevea - Stated that businesses on Azurite do not have the money to <br />buy something they already have -- adequate on-site sewer and water services. <br />Mr. Vevea stated that with every proposal and option presented, he gets more <br />and more confused. Stated that the proposal is not the way he understood it to <br />be at this mornings EDC meeting; as it stands, he is opposed to the project. <br />Mr. Vevea stated that he serves on the EDC and in that capacity he wants to see <br />the project materialize but he can't see that happening if it means he and his <br />neighbors will lose their businesses. Mr. Vevea stated that commercial/ <br />industrial properties are taxed at 6 times the rate at which homesteaded <br />property is taxed; these commercial/industrial properties are being taxed at a <br />rate as if the improvements were already in; these properties cannot afford an <br />additional assessment. Can't afford to pay for something today that he doesn't <br />need today. Suggest existing businesses not be assessed at all. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cox noted that property taxes will increase even more when the <br />improvements are in. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley summarized Council concerns as follows: 1) invesitgate <br />possibility of using some other source of funds for water costs; 2) Prefer 10 <br />year deferment/10 year payment plan option; 3) those that can afford it should <br />begin paying assessments right away and those having to defer should be able to <br /> Sp Council/November 12, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />