1994-10-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 7 Council Business. continued Gunderman questioned the rate differences between New Brighton and other communities. Olson said some communities charge higher rates due to the inclusion of other factors as maintenance, street sweeping, curb and gutter and other costs. Gunderman is pleased that New Brighton rates are lower, but noted concern of future problems. Olson said other communities have different land classifications which they would charge an unimproved vacant lot where New Brighton would not. Benke noted that projects identified for improvement during the five year planning process would need to follow the project development procedures now in place. Wayne Carlson, 197 Windsor Lane, said that if these improvements had been primarily funded through the general fund through property taxes, why is there a need to change the financing strategy. The residents enjoy the tax deductibility of property taxes and see this utility charge as losing that benefit. Benke said the breakeven point is for homes valued at $87,000 or more that would see a reduction. Benke said the question is whether or not the utility fee should be income sensitive. The fundamental issue is that the amount of runoff a property generates is not to be tied to the property value, but the nature of the property. Gunderman said the plan states that complexes like Windsor Green are charged on a per acre basis. Olson said a Windsor Green unit would be charged $1.80 quarterly. Carlson does not understand why a new financing method was proposed. Benke said the City uses tax revenues, special assessments or levied property taxes for stormwater improvements. It is envisioned that in 5 to 10 years there will be a need for significant improvements to aging street and stormwater systems. An alternate to raising property taxes to pay for improvements is to create a utility fund based on drainage contribution, not property value. Fulton said the City identified future improvement projects and the utility fund would provide equity to allocate the stormwater costs. Presently, there is a disparity between the property taxes collected for residential versus industrial/commercial and a stormwater utility fund will correct this inequitableness. Esther Nowlin, 196 Windsor Lane, objects to the "stormwater tax" and feels it moved too hastily and action should not be taken when two Councilmembers are absent. When she spoke to a New Brighton Post Office representative, the representative felt the delivery time was excessive; but a route reorganization was underway and there was no mail service on October 10. Some Post Office employees remembered seeing the bulk mailing on October 13. She said the printer delivered the notices to the St. Paul Post Office on October 5. Because the lateness may not have given proper notice and did not reference the October 25 meeting; she feels action should be tabled and another meeting be held to include Finance Director Margaret Egan. At the October 18 meeting, many people arrived before staff and left because the room was locked and there was no signage. When Benke arrived at the meeting, there was signage. She feels staff and Council need to acquaint themselves in proper notification and mailing procedures. Fulton became aware the Post Office was in transition, but it is hard to judge what affect it had on delivery. It is the City's understanding the notices arrived at the Post Office on October 5. If the notice was not mailed by October 13, a person would have the ability to attend the October 18 meeting. Council Business Stormwater Utility Plan Report 94-253