My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
83-045
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
Resolutions
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
83-045
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:17:40 PM
Creation date
11/14/2006 9:39:59 AM
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.
/
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
<br />. <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: Further comments from the Council? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN MULCAHY: Again, I would like to inquire <br />whether there's an emerging concensus of the Council on the <br />ten year time period for the lots not held by the developer. <br />I would like especially to hear from Councilman McAllister <br />because of her vote on the last project. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN McALLISTER: I think we're opening a can of <br />worms. Every assessment hearing from here on out we'll be <br />having people (inaudible) who are going to want it for ten <br />years (inaudible). I really don't know - mathematically - <br />the difference between spreading it over six years or ten <br />years. The first year it makes a big difference. I'm afraid <br />we're going to have this at a lot of hearings (inaudible) and <br />we'll have all kinds of deferments. I think it's a bad thing <br />to start. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN MULCAHY: The whole question is whether we <br />can truthfully say that we have a greater obligation to <br />people who have been with us a long time than we do to <br />people (inaudible). <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN HICKS: I support the ten years on two <br />parcels - the Johnston site and the Branch site (inaudible). <br />It's long term residents versus development. <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: We're not looking at long term resi- <br />dents - we're looking at our policy of development <br />(inaudible) whether it's 30 years or one year has nothing <br />to do with that. The developer has a particular development <br />agreement to these particular sites (inaudibLe) accelerated <br />pay-off. It has nothing to do with long term residents. <br />It's a particular development agreement with a contractor. <br />I think we should dispose of the fact that the taxpayers <br />are paying (inaudible). The truth of the matter is that Arden <br />Hills will benefit from this. We'll be getting more interest <br />(inaudible). I'm certain that in the long term the taxpayers <br />of Arden Hills will not pay a penny (inaudible) ten years <br />versus six years. We're going to be getting it back with <br />interest, above the interest we may be getting otherwise. <br /> <br />COUNCIU1AN MULCAHY: <br />(inaudible). You might <br />as deserving of the ten <br />the distinction. <br /> <br />I thank you for that clarification <br />treat the property across Snelling <br />year (inaudible). I'm concerned about <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: As far as the years (inaudible) years <br />are good for Arden Hills. We're all citizens of Arden Hills. <br />To me it's not critical on the west side of Snelling either <br />how we handle that, particularly because it is to be developed <br />and platted out. Our previous action would indicate that it <br />would have to be paid off at that point (inaudible). It's <br />how the Council wants to treat this. I think, with the lack <br />of any particular agreement, such as developers ordinarily <br /> <br />-l5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.