06-22-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council June 22, 1988 Car~la was concerned that the Code was not being applied equally in the City. Lane Impr•ovement Mr~. Blesener~ intr•oduced the following r~esolution and moved its adoption: Petition (Cont.) RESOLUTION N0. 88-6-254 - INSTRUCTING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO INSPECT THE CARLA LANE NEIGHBORNOOD FOR JUNK CARS, COMPOST PILES AND ANY OTHER CODE VIOLATIONS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION, AD1D FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT TO INSPECT FOR ALLOb1ABLE STREET LIGHTING AS WELL AS SHRUBERY THAT MAY BE OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC VISIBILITY, AND FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THAT THE CITY HAS RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT TNERE ARE NON-OWNED RECREATIONAL VEHICLES BEING STORED ON CARLA LANE PROPERTY AND INSTRUCTING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO WRITE A LETTER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER INFORMING THEM THAT THE VEHICLE IS TO BE REP40VED The for•egoing r•esolution was duly seconded by Mr•. Collova. Ayes (4) Blesener•, Collova, Scalze, Fahey. Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. This r•esolution appear~s in Resolution Book No. 19, Page 259. Recess At this point in the meeting, 9:02 P.M., Council took a shor~t r•ecess. The meeting was r•econvened at 9:07 P.P4. Taxes Fahey r•epor•ted that as a r~esult of an ar~ticle in the St. Paul and Mi nneapol i s newspaper•s r•egarding the 1988 Ci ti zens League Pr•oper•ty Agenda Tax Sur•vey, the City Auditor• has been requested to r•epor•t on this Addition matter~. Bob Voto, City Auditor, appeared befor•e the Council and submitted a r•epor•t dated June 22, 1988 r•egar•ding the 1988 Citizens League Proper~ty Tax Sur•vey. The Auditor• reviewed this repor~t in detail highlighting that the method used to compar•e 1988 pr•oper~ty taxes in the survey was arbitrary, inappropriate, unfair and erroneous. The Auditor• pointed out that the sur•vey actually contained sever•al methods of comparing/r~anking pr•oper•ty taxes by community and each of those methods leads to differ~ent conclusions as to which community has the highest/lowest taxes. The Aud.itor~ r•eviewed var•ious method.s of compar•ing pr~oper•ty taxes in his repor•t. Using the average pr•ice home method Little Canada r•anked 37th of the 95 communities sur~veyed. The same method from the 1987 sur•vey ranked Little Canada 32nd of the 95 communities. The sur~vey shows that pr•oper•ty taxes i n the Ci ty on the aver•age pr•iced home decr•eased by 6.79% fr~om 1987 to 1988. Page -14-