CC 11-08-1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

------------ ---------- . .' . Minutes of Special Council Meeting Thursday. November 8, 1984 - 8:00 p.m. Page Eight I won't take the time now to do that since the Council has heard me before on this. We are dealing here with a government subsidy to private enterprise. a subsidy of a type I don't think we have to have in Arden Hills. It is generally deleterious to the free enterprise system in the United States. particularly when govsrnment subsidizes one segment against another. I believe in free enterprise you do it freely. without looking to the government for help if you can. This is not one of those instances. It's a classic instance that is non-free enterprise. In fact. it creates no new jobs; it transfers jobs. One of the basic ideas of IRBs was to create new jobs. It is a fBct that you can only create new jobs. as far as the U.S. is concerned, when you change export-import type of things; 4It otherwise, you transfer where the money goes. The transfer in this kind of case is to those people who need .a tax deduction; and from the tax payers. Woodburn said he is concerned also about the viability of the enterprise. It is my understanding that there are a lot of ' veterinarians out of work, that have not found Jobs.. ' Furthermore. in a survey. according to my second-hand jnformation, that the average salary of a veterinarian is $22.000. I can't believe that. It must include the people that are not working. It is emphasized to me by a member of our community, a non-vet. that it's a tough life out there. If indeed this isn't viable, we've had other commercial enterprises look at this property and find it to be non-viable; would they find it to be more viable. under the circum- stances that conceivably could occur, in a few years. I don't know. we might well have a sore thumb on our hands. We've had them before~ As a matter of fact some of the advantages of this proceeding would be that we'd get rid of a sore thumb. at least for awhile. that we've had in Arden Hills. It was a sore thumb to all of us. We'd like to see something happen there. I count square footage a little' differently. I'm not an engineer. I just look at the plain foot print. when we have an average building with a basement. and the footprint on this comes out to be $90+ SF which is approaching some of the highest costs. that would have to be recaptured in some way or other. of any building. Hospitals come a little bit higher. A doctor's office proposed last night to Arden Hills came. on the same footprint basis. at $7S/SF. and that's always been emphasized as being one of the most expensive types of bui1diQg because of the amount of plumbing they have to have in every cubicle etc. $90/SF does not include the costs that are labeled as architectural fees. engineering fees. inspection fees. fiscal. legal and administrative fees. $90/SF is exceedingly high priced for a building on a foot print basis. I felt I had to give my view points. Nothing I have said has anything to do with Or. Routhe whom I admire. I have seldom seen better and more convincing presentation. Mulcahy said, because he has a sensitivity to how a record looks after the meeting I too will give a brief little speech. I think there's an argument to be made for IRBs. I believe that it is principally a useful tool on the part of the City to encourage and to enable it to choose desirable development where it wants to see it. The mayor has alluded to the difficulties that we have had with this partic- ular site. I'm persuaded. largely by that factor. that we can secure a desirable development on this site through the use of this special financing. For that reason I am willing to support it. although I do recognize the arguments for it not being available to everyone. 4It Motion carried (Mulcahy. Hicks. Rauenhorst voting in favor; Woodburn. Hansen voting in opposition (3-2). - - ----------