Minutes - Council - 01/23/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Road # 116 and north of the railroad tracks. She was referring to a parcel of land, approximately 150 acres in size, owned by the BMA Partnership. That piece of property has had a condemnation proceeding started against it by the City of Ramsey. The City of Ramsey intends to condemn that private BMA property for development. This also is the property Governor Ventura and the Metropolitan Council has slated as one of the six "Smart Growth Areas" in the metro area. The City is in line to receive a very large grant from the government to have a company out of Berldey California design a town center in that location. The Kurak family does not now, nor ever will have, interest in that parcel of land. They do, however, own the next piece of undeveloped property to the west, the Highway #10 property mentioned previously. There is another subject that continues to come up in conversation that Ms. Kurak felt needed to be clarified. Residents may have heard that there is a lawsuit waiting to go to trial between the Kuraks and the City of Ramsey. This lawsuit is a condemnation lawsuit that the City of Ramsey has brought against the Kuraks. When County Road #116 was extended, there was a need to obtain property from the Kuraks for the road right of way. After many negotiations with the City, the City of Ramsey did not agree with the Kuraks on the value of their property. The City was only willing to offer $200.00 less an acre for their property than they paid for it 18 years earlier. This, of course, would not work, so the City proceeded with what is referred to as a quick take. Mr. William Goodrich, the City Attorney, went before a judge and garnered the rights to the Kurak property. The County Road #116 extension was completed in 1998, and is in full use today. That lawsuit has not settled yet. That is what is being referred to as the Kurak's lawsuit against the City. She clarified that this is the City of Ramsey versus Kurak, et al; they are not suing the City; the City is suing them. Ms. Kurak stated that she understands that as a Councihnember of Ramsey she cannot and will not vote on any business pertaining to land she owns in Ramsey. This rule is the same for anyone sitting in the capacity as a governmental official. In as much as everyone on the City Council owns property in the City of Ramsey, and she may not be the only person sitting on the Council that might, at some time in the future, find themselves having a conflict of interest in that area. Ms. Kurak stated that she hoped that these statements clear up any questions that residents may have regarding her ownership of property in Ramsey. She believes from the bottom of her heart that the residents will judge her character, honor, morality and ethics, not by what she owns, but rather by the manner in which she conducts herself. She stated that she is available for any resident to call her with any questions they may have. Terry Hendriksen, 15361 Ramsey Boulevard NW, Ramsey, stated that the Council has been presented with a petition which he thinks is out of frustration by citizens. He stated that he received, with his Council packet, a newsletter from the League of Minnesota Cities which talked about Mayors addressing affordable housing and how cities are ready to take the lead on addressing the challenge. Interestingly enough, one of the items they are proposing to do in order to accomplish that goal is to make it easier for cities to rezone land and eliminate the majority vote requirement to rezone property. He stated that he does not think citizens of Ramsey are overwhelmed with bringing affordable housing to Ramsey and presumptuous to change law especially the four-fifths majority to make that happen. Back on December 12"' and December 19% something the citizens are asking for failed because it did not receive the four- fifths majority vote. Two Councilmembers refused to give the residents what they have been City Council/January 23, 2001 Page 6 of 34