Laserfiche WebLink
City Attorney Goodrich replied that the City has chosen to take the State Statute 444.075 route. <br />He explained that when the legislature adopted State Statute 444.075, they understood the <br />difficult process of assessing every property for a storm water project because everyone does not <br />benefit the same, which he felt is exactly what the Attorney General had stated in March 1993. <br />Mr. Goodrich reviewed the statement made by the Attorney General. <br /> <br />Mr. Thompson stated that it is the opinion of the City that the overall water run-off and the cost <br />and projects involved that the City is paying for is an overall system and an overall benefit to the <br />community, but in this case, residents are being assessed $6.00 per quarter and business owners <br />are being assessed considerably more. He stated that the cost of the water run-off should be born <br />equally just like everything else in the tax system. Mr. Thompson stated that he did not think <br />that State Statute 444.075 was intended to be used in this matter for maintaining water run-off <br />and that it is an improper implementation and use of this provision. He questioned if there is a <br />property that can demonstrate that water does not run-off the property and drains into a wetland <br />that. is self contained, how is that property owner benefited by the charge. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson replied that he is sure that there were a lot of people in Eagan that did not feel they <br />provided run-off from their property, but when they had a 500 year storm the problem was <br />apparent. He explained that if a property owner wants to prove to the City that they can handle a <br />25-year storm, then they can apply for a 25 percent credit. <br /> <br />Mr. Thompson replied that this could have been handled as an overall tax, but instead the City <br />chose to impose this charge. He questioned what the overall tax increase would be if it would <br />have been handled as an increase in City taxes. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec replied approximately three percent, but explained that the City is already <br />proposing a budget increase this year, and the general feeling of the Council was to handle the <br />charge in the way of a storm drainage utility fee. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that if the City were to assess the same rate for every property <br />then the properties that have gone through a significant amount of effort to contain their water on <br />their own property would not receive any reduction. He explained that the basic unit charge is <br />based on a residential property and the more run-off that a property creates the more they will be <br />charged. He stated that the City is trying to live within the guidelines that are imposed, and do it <br />in a fair and equitable way. <br /> <br />Larry Peterson, Connexus Energy, 14601 Ramsey Boulevard NW, Ramsey, stated that they <br />question the equity in the charges and the foundation used to assess the charges. He noted that <br />they have not paid the charges and don't see paying them in the immediate future. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson explained the process for determining the charge. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson inquired if each site was viewed individually. <br /> <br />City Council/September 26, 2000 <br /> Page 21 of 36 <br /> <br /> <br />