My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 12-04-1997
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
CC 12-04-1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:51 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 3:22:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
<br /> ARDEN HILLS TRUTH-IN-TAXATION - DECEMBER 4, 1997 5 <br /> . Mayor Probst noted it should have no short-term effect. Longer term, there would be a positive <br /> effect because when the bonds are paid, the full tax collections percent will go to the School <br /> District and County, <br /> Roger Aiken, 4360 Hamline Avenue, inquired as to what the incremental amount would be, <br /> ML Post pointed out that numbcr is speculative at this time, because it would be dependent upon <br /> many factors such as the market value of the property, the tax capacity, etc. The projections are <br /> currently $500,000, but that would be shared by all the jurisdictions, 15% of which would be <br /> Arden Hills. <br /> ML Fritsinger noted when it was decided to use TIF, the City projections were based on a class <br /> rate of3,5%, so it was designed to minimize the risk to the City, <br /> Mr. Aiken expressed concern regarding the use ofTIF, Mr. Aiken noted perhaps there could be <br /> a return on investment for current residents, rather than to wait "down the road" when the <br /> Council and residents have changed, <br /> Mr, Aiken complimented the Staff and Council for all their hard work. He stated he did want to <br /> raise concern about the expense for the Gateway development. He wanted to know ifthe <br /> residents would see a return for this investment. <br /> . Mayor Probst indicated he was unsure ofML Aiken's questioning, He noted the fundamental <br /> logic was, once public improvements were in, it would set up the City for development of the <br /> remaining land so projects that come on board would have reduced additional costs for streets, <br /> etL to the City, <br /> ML Aiken continued to express concern regarding the annual increase of City property levies, <br /> when the City didn't seem to need it, and perhaps should have given the citizens a break. <br /> Although he did note that if no increase was given now, residents would complain in the <br /> following years when an increase was necessary, <br /> Mayor Probst stated he didn't believe the City would consider rebates as the answer. He noted <br /> the City has received the benefit of previous Councils who have set aside funds so the City is in <br /> the position to build facilities without additional levies or bond issues. Mayor Probst also noted <br /> as thc tax capacity is increased, everyone's taxes should start to come down. <br /> Mr. Aiken inquired as to street maintenance, how much is the actual increase and how much is <br /> just different allocations. Mr. Post pointed out from the operation standpoint there are no <br /> changes, but there are greater capital expenses. <br /> ML Aiken inquired if there was a tracking of the Gateway development. He noted again he was <br /> wondering if the citizens would see a return on their investment. Mayor Probst noted all funds <br /> . are identified in the City records and available for anyone to review, <br /> ML Aiken inquired if there was a concrete dollar amount expected on the investment for the <br /> Gateway development. Mayor Probst noted there is no such guaranteed amount and the City is <br /> doing everything possible to safeguard the City's investment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.