Laserfiche WebLink
Josh Fuerick, 14573 Bowers Drive, stated that at the end of the day, this is the cheapest way for <br />residents to fund the road improvements needed. He stated that this is the most efficient way of <br />funding. He noted that even though an assessment can be paid over years, interest is charged, and <br />the City is bonding which adds additional cost. He noted that time is also wasted by people <br />complaining about the assessments and petitioning against road projects. He commented that each <br />person is charged the same amount, regardless of property value. He stated that the City should <br />look to spend the least amount of money to fix the roads and move on. He stated that the people <br />that have been charged assessments most likely support the $14 monthly payment over the $6,000 <br />assessment they were charged. <br />Mr. Benson reviewed the language related to Chapter 8 of the City Charter related to special <br />assessments. He stated that this language was developed prior to the idea of franchise fees even <br />being thought of. He stated that if the City wants to use franchise fees there should be a City <br />referendum to remove the special assessment section from the City Charter. <br />Troy Cooper, 15160 Cobalt St NW, stated that when high density housing was added to Ramsey, <br />the idea was that housing product would add to the tax base. He asked where those funds went as <br />they did not require additional roads for those structures. He asked the protections that would be <br />in place to prevent tax increases as franchise fees would be outside of that cap. He commented <br />that from 2019 to 2020 his property taxes increased 4.5 percent and the franchise fee would be <br />another six percent per year. He stated that he is also a business owner in Ramsey so would be <br />paying twice. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated that the additional tax base is reflecting in the annual budget and <br />levy, therefore the value of the apartments is shown and offset the levy. He stated that if the rates <br />in the ordinance were changed, the same process would need to be followed with public hearings. <br />He stated that currently there is not a property tax cap on the levy. He stated that there have been <br />levy limits in the past, set by the State, but the State has not placed a limit in the past several years. <br />Finance Director Lund stated that a property tax amount would be based off the area of the City <br />the property is located in. She provided further clarification on the TIF District and the funds <br />collected through that method. She explained that for the development that occurs within The <br />COR, the value of those improvements has to stay within the TIF District for a set period of time. <br />Mayor LeTourneau commented that the TIF Districts are meant to help development and attract <br />different uses within those TIF Districts based on planning. <br />Finance Director Lund explained that the property tax dollars for those developments have <br />restrictions on what they can be used for during that set period. <br />Mr. Benson asked if property tax dollars within The COR could not be used for road improvements <br />outside of that area. <br />Finance Director Lund stated that properties built within that tax increment district would have <br />restrictions. She noted that the property taxes generated by the land value itself would go into the <br />City Council / July 14, 2020 <br />Page 8 of 18 <br />