Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 16, 2013 <br />of Maplewood for providing the services. He noted that given <br />Maplewood's assessment cap, if the Little Canada properties were <br />annexed to Maplewood, assessments would range from $4,500 to capping <br />out at $7,690. Again, based on Little Canada's policy, most of these <br />properties would be assessed $8,156.25 with one at $4,893.75. <br />The Administrator then reviewed a financial comparison sheet which <br />showed an estimated impact to these properties in annexing to <br />Maplewood. While assessments would likely decrease, given Maplewood <br />has a higher tax rate, property taxes would increase. <br />The Administrator pointed out that the issue of annexation does not have <br />to be decided this evening. He indicated that that there is a pride factor in <br />being a Little Canada resident, but the Council wanted the property <br />owners to be aware of the issues and provide their input on this matter. <br />The Administrator reported that detachment and annexation is a statutory <br />process, and there are three ways to accomplish it. The mostly likely way <br />this would occur would be for both cities to pass the same resolution on <br />the detachment /annexation which would then be submitted to the <br />Boundary Adjustment Board for finalization. If that process is <br />undertaken, the detachment /annexation would occur in 2014 for <br />implementation in 2015. <br />One property owner asked Maplewood's policy on septic systems and <br />wells. The Maplewood Engineer indicated that Maplewood does not force <br />property owners to connect to city systems. However, he has found that <br />once a septic system fails, it is typically less expensive to connect to city <br />sewer than put in a new system. <br />One property owner asked how Little Canada would reimburse <br />Maplewood for providing services to these properties. He asked if it <br />would cost the property owners more money. The City Administrator <br />indicated that there would be ajoint powers agreement between the two <br />cities to govern this. Property owners would not be charged anything <br />more. <br />All of the property owners present indicated that their preference was to <br />remain Little Canada properties. Based on that response, the Mayor <br />indicated that this issue would not move forward. <br />The property owner at the corner of County Road B and McMenemy <br />asked about sidewalk extension in front of their property along County <br />Road B. She noted that their property dropped off drastically from the <br />street and questioned the feasibility of extending a sidewalk in this area. <br />5 <br />