Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Holasek stated that there would only need to be a drainage pipe under the track if the pipe <br />were on the north side of the tracks. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied that the pipe going on the south side of the track would be the <br />same as what has been proposed. <br /> <br />Mr. Holasek read the following petition: "Please add the following comments to our petition of <br />January 9, 2001, and the additional information we added to it February 27, 2001. Again we <br />respectfully ask the City Council to consider our request to not construct the above project and to <br />drop its condemnation action and storm sewer tax on our properties. The reasons for this are <br />clearly stated in our petition presented January 9, 2001, and our addition to it on February 27, <br />2001. We find it incomprehensible that the City of Ramsey would condemn our property to <br />construct a stom~ sewer pipe on it that currently does not need storm water drainage. For the <br />City of Ramsey to attempt to correct their engineering mistake of failing to construct an outlet to <br />their Business Park 95 Pond when they built it in 1996 by now using eminent domain laws to <br />build it on our property is inconceivable. It violates every recognized ethical and moral principal <br />of good government. But then for the City to make you pay for a storm sewer outlet pipe from <br />their Business Park Pond by levying an unrealistic sewer tax that raises our real estate taxes paid <br />to the City of Ramsey by over 300 percent is unbelievable. Presently, most of this property, with <br />the exception of the new Zitco Development, is not developed extensively enough to bring in <br />revenue to support this high storm sewer tax. This places a real hardship on these property <br />owners. Therefore, we again respectfully ask the City Council to drop its eminent domain <br />proceedings and storm sewer tax on our property and build the outlet to their Business Park Pond <br />on the north side of the BNSF railroad tracks where the City already has storm sewer easements. <br />However, if the City Council will not honor this request of ours and insists upon trying to force <br />this storm sewer pipe on us along with the unrealistic storm sewer tax that our property cannot <br />support, then we ask the City to consider an outright purchase of our property at fair market <br />value." <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the Council had given the City Administrator <br />authorization to discuss the possibility of the City acquiring the properties with the property <br />owners and inquired as to what has happened since that time. <br /> <br />Mr. Holasek replied that the property owners don't necessarily want to sell the property, but they <br />are facing an unrealistic burden so they have no choice. <br /> <br />Jim Gilbertson, J.R.'s, stated that the last couple of days there have been a lot of articles in the <br />newspapers about TIF in other cities and the problems that it has caused. He inquired as to what <br />the percentage of TIF the City of Ramsey had. In regards to the storm water subdrainage district, <br />he stated that everyone is going to be in court a long time over the issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec noted that staff could get the TIF information for Mr. Gilbertson. <br /> <br />City Council/June 12, 2001 <br /> Page 8 of 19 <br /> <br /> <br />