04-27-93 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 Attorney Filla explained the city can buy the land if it is ( for a public purpose. A public purpose is not trying to avoid having Oakdale annex that part of the area. If you continue to control the use of the land, it does have some value. It gives you a bigger base in which to levy special assessments. Long term it gives you a tax value that you can collect some money which is why we want Oakdale to use that in the formula for any transfer of land. Mayor John understood if it is a straight forward annexation, there is never any compensation paid to the losing city for the loss of tax revenue involved. Therefore, you can't argue that in terms of this annexation. Attorney Filla didn't agree with the statement that there never is any consideration given to a city that loses property through annexation. The Municipal Board can require compensation of one party to another. Council member Conlin indicated School District #622 has been looking at a piece of land between 10th Street and 4th to build a K-5 and Community Ed facility. Can they swap MnDOT land for public school land? Filla: Yes. The best scenario for Lake Elmo is that we retain MnDOT property and it is developed privately and generate some tax revenue. Filla thought it would be great if we could get beyond the end of the legislative session before we start submitting detailed proposals to Oakdale. He thought there was some measure of persuasion attached to how a council perceives how the public is reacting to this. If we had a piece of legislation that outlined the agreement that we want, support it publicly, the public understands that we are being very reasonable. Everything we have talked about can be taken care of in a joint powers agreement between the two cities. Attorney Filla pointed out the changes Neary has made in the proposed legislation. Councilman Johnson reported that he, Mayor John and Administrator Kueffner met with Pam Neary on Friday morning on how to change the legislation so that it would be acceptable to the city. Neary's reasoning was she felt obligated to get something done because the way the two cities were going (Oakdale putting in a separate line was nonsense). She felt the only way around this was to draft this legislation which would force the two cities to come to some agreement because next session of the legislature this bill would be reintroduced by Walt Perlt and this time it would be passed because he would have done his homework. At the time she drafted this legislation, she was not aware of the letter that we authorized to the City of Oakdale.