Laserfiche WebLink
Councihncmbcr Elvig stated that Mr. Zaetsch made reference to enterprise funds of $11 million. <br />[-Ie says the City has funds there but the reason the funds are there is because sometimes there is <br />a need t'or a deeper pipe. We use enterprise funds for overages - that's what the City participates <br />with. You say the City does not participate in that fee - the people who are getting it would be <br />paying all. tte suggested that would be doubling up. <br /> <br />Mr. Zaetsch stated you cannot charge more but you are doing that with enterprise funds. He <br />talked about developer John Peterson who wants sewer and water for his development, therefore, <br />he will loan the City $6 million but he wants it back. No one can stop him from building 260 <br />houses but no one is saying he has an absolute right to do that. He had a way to do that. He <br />went for special privileges and he got that. If the City permits that, they should make him pay <br />tbr thc cost of that. If people vote to change the Charter, only people can vote to change it again. <br />The protection needs to be there. This is an escrow - there can be a refund. It's only to protect a <br />tbrced hookup. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec reiterated that the City cannot force a person to hook up. <br /> <br />Mr. Zaetsch stated Council can pass an ordinance that would change that fact. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec agreed that things can change; however, this City Council is a good City Council <br />and wc protect people. <br /> <br />Mr. l-Icndriksen stated he is under no illusion that the Council intends to do anything other than <br />what thc attorneys have said to do. If Council wanted to be fair, they would have provided these <br />opinions in advance. These have been withheld to make an opposing argument more difficult. <br />The argumcnt falls completely apart if this is determined not to be a taking. Mr. LeFevere said <br />that this is determined to be a taking. He must believe there is some doubt this is a taking. If <br />there is some doubt in his mind, then it does not rise to the position of manifestly <br />unconstitutional. With the "boxes" example, a statement was made about disproportionately <br />high costs. What's the true value of being able to develop hundreds of acres decades before it <br />should have been able to be developed. He gave an example of manifestly unconstitutional hook <br />tip with regard to a gas line. He added that maybe the benefit value is truly present for Mr. <br />?etcrson as he can get these houses built sooner. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that Mr. Hendriksen used the gas line extension as an example, it <br />cost $5,000 to run the line to his house; however, the gas company did not ask Mr. Hendriksen to <br />pay to hook up everyone else. <br /> <br />Mr. I lendriksen replied no, and added when there are multiple readings of something, you need <br />to read it in the constitutional way. The supporters of this petition intended it to be <br />constitutional. <br /> <br />Councilmcmber Elvig stated this says if you want to go by people with the pipe, you pay for <br />evcry hookup. <br /> <br />City Council - Special Meeting May 18, 2005 <br /> Page 8 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />