My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 10/10/2000
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2000
>
Minutes - Council - 10/10/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 2:05:09 PM
Creation date
5/22/2003 3:23:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
10/10/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
out to the businesses. He stated that he felt the meeting wOuld be a good idea for everyone to <br />achieve a better understanding of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson stated that the City has set up a process where individual businesses have to come <br />to the City and argue for an equitable fee and they have also set up a formula that the citizens <br />cannot understand. <br /> <br />Councihnember Hendriksen replied that the Council wanted to correctly assess those people that <br />were creating the majority of the runoff and he has not heard an argument that proved this is not <br />fair. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson replied that if the City wants to talk about runoff then it has to be with the amount <br />of water that leaves the property that City has to deal with. But, if it is impervious area, then that <br />is a different situation. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that adding the fee to property taxes would be a huge benefit to some but he <br />doesn't think that is fair. He suggested that the City Administrator should schedule a meeting <br />with the business owners and the City Engineer to discuss the ordinance. <br /> <br />Consensus of the Council was to direct staff to schedule a meeting to explain the storm drainage <br />utility ordinance and the formula that is used. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson inquired if the City should continue with the billing of the fee. <br /> <br />Consensus of the Council was to continue with the billings at this time. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the City of Ramsey has 20,000 people and 20 business <br />owners were present in the audience requesting that a portion of the cost should be shifted to the <br />residents which is not justified. If the business owners think it is fair, he would like to hear their <br />justification as to why the City should shift the cost from the people who produce the most <br />runoff. <br /> <br />Bernie Vevea, Ve~Ve, Inc., stated that the City is calling the storm sewer utility a maintenance <br />charge and questioned how many miles of storm sewer the City has that needs maintenance. In <br />his opinion there is very few miles. He questioned how old the City's storm sewer system is. <br />Mr. Vevea stated that Ramsey is not like other cities who have miles of storm sewer that go <br />down every city block and are more than a 100 years old. At the last meeting, the Council stated <br />that some of the funds would be used for ditches in residential areas because in the spring some <br />of the septic systems may not be working well. Then the City should be creating funds for <br />ditches in the residential area. He also noted that aerial photographs do not show elevations and <br />businesses already have holding ponds as required by the City. Most of the soil in Ramsey is <br />sand and there is no runoff from the business in the residential area. If the City needs funds for <br />the residential areas, then it should be assessed as any other project because businesses are not <br />going to pay for these improvements when they are not causing the problems because they are <br /> <br />City Council/October 10, 2000 <br /> Page 10 of 17 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.