My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 02/26/1979
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1979
>
Agenda - Council - 02/26/1979
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 2:36:04 PM
Creation date
8/10/2004 2:00:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
02/26/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
138
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
-2- <br /> <br />In long-term areas, contracting probably will not work. Perhaps two systems, a long4term <br />and short-term,will work. The farmers in transitional areas need contracts, but this <br />program will not save the land surrounding his from development. As far as time period <br />on contracts are determined, it was suggested that municipalities should decide. <br /> <br />The struggle with property rights surfaced again during this discussion as it has in <br />many others. A farmer has a right to his investment; yet land should be viewed as serving <br />the needs of the public good. The Wisconsin program points to an attitude that all <br />owners are tenants on the land. <br /> <br />Members generally agreed on assessing farmland at use value. <br /> <br />The idea of a development right tax came up during discussion, The tax would be levied on <br />those landowners innending to develop. These owners would get no tax break. Ail land <br />might be assigned a development right and be left untaxed until the right is recorded. <br /> <br />Another thought on discouraging development suggested progressively higher-cost building <br />permits on land the farther out a developer goes. It was agreed that marginal land <br />could be developable near urban areas. Some changes in frontage requirements may be <br />necessary, but the state metes and bounds provides for division of five acres however <br />a landowner wishes. <br /> <br />In considering the designation of agricultural areas, the difficult question arises as to <br />how to designate and who should designate these areas. Probably the local governing bodies <br />must take responsibility. Members observed that locals often give out variances and abuse <br />their power. They must be provided with rules and regulations to safeguard against <br />misuse of power. Perhaps locals should have to answer to another authoritative body. <br /> <br />The two certain provisions that were agreed upon are agriculture classifications and <br />use-value assessment. <br /> <br />For the next meeting, it was decided that staff, along with Bill Schreiber, would draft <br />proposals for the group to discuss and analyze. <br /> <br />7.17 .78 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.