Minutes - Council Work Session - 08/13/2012

Home

Councilmember Elvig stated that may be the requirement, but the City typically provides notice to 650 feet so it will be a substantial notice. City Attorney Goodrich advised that one of the practical problems is finding the underlying property owner, noting the development corporation or individual may be gone so you would then need to follow the family tree and potentially probate, which is an extensive process. Councilmember McGlone asked if it could be a layered approach depending on whether you can find the underlying property owner. He noted even if the underlying property owner wants the property back, it still puts it on the tax rolls. City Attorney Goodrich advised that if the City takes away the public use requirement and the lot sits, then it could go back to tax forfeit and be purchased. Councilmember Strommen stated the assumption is being made the City could sell or get the property back on the tax rolls but many are properties that do not have a lot of value. She expressed concern about putting a lot of investment in the process . and then not receiving as much benefit as anticipated. Councilmember Strommen suggested staff look at parcels that appear to be developable and compare them to taxed assessed parcels so it can be determined what would be gained. She would like staff to weigh that benefit against the time and effort put into the process. Councilmember McGlone stated the land has value whether or not it is buildable. He noted in Windsor Woods the neighbors expressed interest in having a larger lot and then it would be off the City's maintenance list and go back on the tax rolls. Councilmember Strommen noted that piece of land could have been developed but there is other land that is wetland where there is no benefit to buying since it is undeveloped and would remain in that state. Councilmember McGlone stated the idea is to get the best result and he understands the City is not able to sell or un- dedicate all excess land. Councilmember Strommen asked about the cost to do that in staff time, noting it may be more than the City will receive in benefit and there may be a low cost to maintain the properties. Mayor Ramsey stated the Council went through a process to create a policy to do this so he supports following that policy and allowing staff to use common sense on which parcels have enough value to consider. He noted if the property has no value, perhaps it should be given to the adjacent property owner so taxes are paid on the property. The consensus of the Council was to support looking at properties with the most amount of benefit for the least amount of cost and directed staff to prioritize the properties based on that standard. 2.02: Discuss Alcohol Policy in Public Places City Council Work Session / August 13, 2012 Page 2 of 6