Laserfiche WebLink
91 H.R.A. MEETING <br />DECEMBER 10, 1991 <br />3 PAGE 2 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 It was noted that the surplus can only be used in the Tax <br />7 Increment District and the only parcel available for <br />8 development is the Meta property. <br />9 <br />10 The initial property tax per unit in the Autumn Woods <br />11 development was projected to be 61,100 in 1991. The per unit <br />12 property tax projections were made with 1968 State Legislature <br />13 property tax class rate classifications. It was noted that <br />14 since 1988 the Legislature has changed and manipulated this <br />15 system. The result has been an increase per unit property tax <br />16 expenses. The extra expense of property tax per unit has <br />17 placed excessive burdens on the project's operating expenses. <br />18 It is the concern of LaNel that any additional increases in <br />19 rent would increase the vacancy rate and bring about a revenue <br />20 loss. <br />21 <br />22 The Mayor noted that since the Legislature has made changes in <br />23 the past it is quite feasible that changes may be made in the <br />24 future. <br />25 <br />LaNel has petitioned the Hennepin County Assessor to lower the <br />valuation of the development. The City Manager noted that this <br />28 petition is pending but it allows the H.R.A. and staff time to <br />29 confer with Hennepin County regarding the petition. <br />30 <br />31 Frank Lange, representing LaNel, advised that the petition is <br />32 no longer "pending" but has been settled. Hennepin County has <br />33 responded that the valuation will not be lowered. No <br />34 litigation will be considered. <br />35 <br />36 The City Manager recalled that at a previous Council work <br />37 session it had been decided that the present Council chooses <br />38 not to commit future Councils to a long term position on this <br />39 matter. It is the intention of the Council to evaluate this <br />40 matter on a yearly basis and on need. <br />41 <br />42 Mr. Lange stated he would prefer this matter be "procedural" <br />43 and not have to return each year for this entire process. He <br />44 felt only the review process would be necessary on an annual <br />45 basis. <br />46 <br />47 Motion by Marks, second by Enrooth to authorize the City <br />48 Manager and the City Attorney to draft this proposal as <br />49 previously defined for the next H.R.A. meeting on January <br />50 14th. <br />5 <br />The City Manager noted in his agenda letter that the infusion <br />5:3 of $50,000 per year for 1991 and 1992 is justified and that <br />54 there should be an annual review until the bonds and the tax <br />