03-15-1982 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes March 15, 1982 P ag e 8 ability to say no at any point of the project was based on technical problems Or considerations rather than the basic policy decision or question to proceed at all. Councilman Duitsman indicated his opposition to the industrial revenue bond financing project for single family homes ashe felt it was a special interest for one developer and that it was unfair to the other developers in the community and as such not beneficial to the community. Councilman Duitsman further in- dicated that he felt the City should be developed from the inner core out and with the cutbacks in state aid, funds would not be available to service the outlaying areas of the city. Councilman Schuldt intent for the use not home building. indicated that it was his impression that the present Council's of industrial revenue bonds was business and industry, and He was not in favor of the proposal. Councilman Engstrom indicated that he could see the issues both for and against the project and further indicated that he could appreciate what Mr. Carson has done in order to provide financing for a project. Councilman Engstrom further indicated that he could see the benefit to the school system but could see the problems the project would cause for the other local developers and builders in the community and therefore, indicated that he was not in favor of the project. Councilman Toth indicated that as referred to in the 1979 resolution, he was the one dissenting vote, and further indicated that he felt industrial revenue bonds are for industrial financing and not single family financing. Councilman Toth further indicated that he felt the growth of the City should happen from the inner city out and therefore, was not in favor of the financing project for the Tamarack Subdivision. COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 82-4, A RESOLUTION RESCINDING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PROJECT PROPOSED BY CARSON, INC. COUNCILMAN TOTH SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Dick Carson asked if he could provide information indicating that the majority of builders and realtors in the City of Elk River were in favor of the project, would the City Council reconsider the industrial revenue bond request. The City Administrator indicated that there were enough negatives from the proposal and changes in law and state and federal policy, that should more positive builder input be provided, it would not counter-act the negative factors already present. Councilman Toth indicated that his view would not change. Councilman Engstrom indicated that he was not in favor of the industrial revenue bond financing and further indicated that he felt the City should develop from the inner city out and therefore, would not change his opinion. Councilman Duitsman indicated that in 1979, he was in favor of the project because of the parks the project would provide to the City, but with levy limit restrictions now placed on the City, the City would not be able to provide the maintenance for the park and therefore, he could not at this time approve the industrial revenue bond financing project. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.