My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_6487
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
06xxx
>
6400
>
res_6487
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:10:00 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 11:52:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
6487
Resolution Title
Ordering the construction of Improvement No. SS-W-P-ST-76-23 under and pursuant to Minnesota statutes, chapter 429
Resolution Date Passed
5/9/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />MR. REILING: You already grabbed what you see as <br />V~lley Park. The village grabbed that. I'm not anxious to have <br />any more grabbed, and talking about the first fellow that was <br />up here about wanting natural open space - I think one of the <br />statements he made was we could have sold it to open space. <br />We would have been glad to sell it to them, but they wanted to <br />steal the property. They didn't want to buy it. This is <br />true. Plus some other reasoning - the other reason was if <br />they has to pay what it was worth, then the taxpayer couldn't <br />afford the price of leaving it open land. but when it went <br />through the assessment and through the board that sits and <br />listens and give you the values - the Commissioners - <br />it went through hhere, and it went twice as high as what open <br />space expected it to go to and that twice as high was peanuts <br />compared to what lots are worth, so it wasn't because we wouldn't <br />want to sell to open space. Somebody is going to buy it. I <br />don't want to eat it. If open space had wanted to buy it, we <br />would have sold it. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN GRAUEL: You were talking about the pond, and <br />as Charlie brought up about the amenity of having the pond,in <br />the area, end open the water space, and do you feel that the <br />properties that you have to develop around there - the single <br />family homes - would be better by having the pond there and <br />more salable being near open water than it would with dry land. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: I think everyone likes water, but the only <br />thing is I'm not driving a Cadillac because I can't afford it. <br />I don't want that pond. (Inaudible). <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: What you really ffie2ln is MC'ry hasn't gotten <br />one out of you. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: One day we'll probably have it, but you put <br />taxes on us so strong. Government starts here and it goes up <br />to the county and you have influence with the county. To <br />answer you question, I don't thing the cost is worth the <br />addition (inaudible). <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: The assessment for storm sewer is not directly <br />based on the cost of the storm sewer improvement as proposed in <br />this project. The assessment is ~295 a lot and that would be <br />the same if, say $10,000, was saved in the project or if we <br />found $10,000 or more to be spent on the project. It's based <br />on the city's standard policy. <br /> <br />-16- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.