My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
09-14-1993 Charter Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Charter
>
Minutes
>
1993 Minutes
>
09-14-1993 Charter Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2022 7:22:11 PM
Creation date
5/6/2022 10:57:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Meeting Date
09/14/1993
Charter Meeting Type
Special
Charter Document Type
Minutes
Retention Until
Permanent
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
Statute 429? The answer was yes. Mr. Tenneson asked if this <br /> landowner was holding up the re-alignment of 49/Lake Drive and the <br /> answer was yes. <br /> Ms. Donlin said she did not see why developers cannot wait and go <br /> through the process instead of changing the regulations we have put <br /> in place to protect ourselves. She was told that they will go some <br /> place else rather than wait. <br /> Tim Lehn, 6781 East Shadow Lake Drive - Mr. Lehn said he did not <br /> own his own business but did understand commerce and what it takes <br /> to bring businesses into an area and knew that they would go <br /> someplace else if they have to wait. He also explained that the <br /> 49/Lake Drive intersection must be re-aligned to save lives. In <br /> the process the landowner will have a more valuable piece of <br /> property. He felt the process could be changed to require him to <br /> pay his fair share of the costs. He noted that the landowner <br /> cannot be assessed more than the increase in the value of his <br /> property. <br /> Gentleman in the audience - Under the present Charter system, if a <br /> majority of the landowners vote for the improvement, what happens <br /> to the person who does not want the improvement? Mr. Peskar <br /> explained that he will be assessed his fair share and he has the <br /> same protection as anyone else under State Statute 429. He can <br /> argue that the assessment is not spread fairly or that the amount <br /> exceeds the increase in his market value. <br /> Mr. Stadum noted that Lino Lakes is unique and we are distinguished <br /> from the neighbors in that our neighborhoods are micro settlements. <br /> He asked if the Charter is changed and State Statute 429 is adopted <br /> for the three (3) specific areas, who does this empower? Mr. <br /> Peskar explained that the Charter empowers the citizens more that <br /> the State Statutes. He said the question is what is the result of <br /> that empowerment if you want to use special assessments to finance <br /> improvements? This is a value judgement. <br /> Darrell Phillips, 158 Maryy Street - Mr. Phillips said that the <br /> landowner is not the reason for the delay in the 49/Lake Drive <br /> project. He said it was the City, County and State. Mr. <br /> Schumacher explained that method of funding the re-alignment noting <br /> that the State and County have approved their funding. However, <br /> Lino Lakes must pay its share. The City must sell bonds to fund <br /> the City portion of the improvement and the City cannot use taxes <br /> to repay the bonds. <br /> Mr. Phillips again said that it is the State, County and City <br /> holding up the re-alignment. Mr. Schumacher explained that this is <br /> not true, the design, plans and specifications have all been <br /> completed and approved. Only the Lino Lakes portion of the funding <br /> is not settled. <br /> PAGE 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.