Laserfiche WebLink
assessments. The proposed ordinance states that a developer must provide <br />25% cash deposit up front and a letter of credit guaranteeing remainder <br />of payment on assessments. <br /> <br />Art Raudio stated that normally if cities want economic growth, they are <br />going to have to be competitive with other communities. He further commented <br />that the City would have the right to retain letter of credit, using those <br />monies to the City's advantage, for the entire length of time stated in the <br />agreement even if the assessments are paid off prior to that period stated. <br /> <br />Mr. Berg stated that the City will establish PIR funds and those funds will <br />continue to grow and can be utilized for oversizing, thereby eliminating the <br />need to assess residential property owner. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cox reiterated the fact that developers have been used by the <br />City, the City's major aim is not to burden residential homeowner and how <br />important it is to obtain the connections to the edge of Ramsey with Metro <br />funds. He further noted that if Ramsey does not present a need and accept <br />the connections, when and if municipal sewer and water does become necessary <br />for Ramsey, which could happen if there is contamination resulting from the <br />landfill, then those utilities will have to be brought to the City of Ramsey <br />as the expense of the residents. Commissioner Cox then gave a brief history <br />of boundary negotiations between Anoka and Ramsey which led to the landfill <br />and other potential tax base property being located in Ramsey. Commissioner <br />Cox also noted that residential homestead tax is very little in comparison to <br />the services Ramsey residents are receiving. <br /> <br />Art Raudio agreed that a certain amount of industry and business are required <br />in order to support the community. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Fults to recommend Ramsey City Council adopt the proposed <br />utility assessment ordinance with the following guidelines: <br /> <br />1) That the adoption of the utility assessment ordinance be an amendment <br /> to the subdivision code. <br /> <br />2) <br /> <br />That the EDC supports the installation of municipal utilities in only <br />undeveloped land and then only when the landowners request municipal <br />utilities. <br /> <br />3) <br /> <br />That the EDC recommends changing the proposed assessment ordinance such <br />that a developer who requests municipal utilities can pledge his land <br />as collateral in lieu of a letter of credit or bond. <br /> <br />4) <br /> <br />It is further directed that Council include in the utility assessment <br />ordinance or adopt by resolution that the EDC shall review requests for <br />municipal utilities to insure no individual is unfairly treated in any <br />expansion of municipal utilities. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cox seconded the motion for discussion. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Commissioner Cox brought up point #3 of Commissioner Fults' <br />motion regarding differential between letter of credit and allowing for land as <br />collateral. Commissioner Cox noted that bonding has been almost impossible to <br />obtain because of defaults in the past and the current trend is towards a local <br /> <br />Sp EDC/April 15, 1983 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />