My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-21-2013 EDC Minutes
Laserfiche
>
Economic Development (Permanent)
>
EDC Minutes
>
2013
>
05-21-2013 EDC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2016 3:41:10 PM
Creation date
9/30/2016 3:41:10 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE <br /> MAY 21,2013 <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Jurchen, Barb Merritt, Cindy Rieck, and Cindy <br /> Roggenkamp <br /> MEMBERS ABSENT: Tommy Woog <br /> ALSO PRESENT: Sandy Peine, City Clerk; Sheila Haverkamp, BLAEDC; <br /> and Dawn Bittner, Zoning Administrator <br /> 1. Call Meeting to Order <br /> The meeting was called to order by Chair Jurchen at 8:00 a.m. <br /> 2. Approval of 4-16-2013 EDC Minutes <br /> COMMISSIONER RIECK MOVED TO APPROVE THE 4/16/2013 EDC <br /> MINUTES. COMMISSIONER MERRITT SECONDED THE MOTION. <br /> MOTION CARRIED 4-0. <br /> 3. Urban and Rural Taxing Districts <br /> Jack Schmidt questioned what the EDC hopes to do that the Council themselves is <br /> not capable of doing. <br /> The EDC reviewed the information provided by Springsted for the urban and rural <br /> district tax rate analysis. The analysis consisted of a 6-year phase in of the current <br /> rural tax rate to that of the urban tax rate. The analysis provided the impact of the <br /> phase-in on various property types. The EDC reviewed the impact on properties <br /> both in the rural and urban districts. <br /> The taxable market value in the rural district is larger than that in the urban <br /> district. Because of this, the property owners in the rural district will realize a <br /> smaller increase than the decrease that the urban area property owners will <br /> realize. <br /> Chair Jurchen stated that the Springsted study used a six-year phase in because <br /> that is what was used in the original annexation agreement for the commercial <br /> properties. He stated that a six-year phase-in to equalize the remaining properties <br /> is too long. He noted that this must be done in a manner that is fair to all property <br /> owners and suggested a three-year phase-in period. <br /> John Derksen stated that this has been a concern for many years, but nothing has <br /> ever been done to correct it. Cindy Roggenkamp stated that the EDC is in the <br /> process of studying the issue and will be making a recommendation to the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.