Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
it equitable. He thought the School District should immediately <br />drop the impact fee. He thought the maximum effort should go into <br />the bond issue for the basic needs of the next several years. <br /> <br />Mayer felt that equity is a very difficult issue in this area. He <br />thought, on an objective basis, it would have to be shown that <br />whatever fee that was charged was reasonably related statistically <br />to the number of children. He stated that it didn't necessarily <br />have to be a flat fee. He explained that, if this passes, there <br />will probably be $50.00/year rise in taxes on a $150,000.00 house. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that, if a developer is dedicating land to the <br />city, that should be a credit against the impact fee, which he felt <br />should be added. He felt a transfer tax is more equitable, but <br />Amendment 1 made that unconstitutional. He stated that the impact <br />fee is a way for growth to pay partially for those things that <br />growth is causing. <br /> <br />Lathrop stated that there is an equitable way: A use tax on <br />building materials. If a person builds a home, they pay a use tax. <br />Use tax is equalized by the value of the home and the amount of <br />materials that go into the home. If a person adds two bedrooms to <br />their house, they pay use tax on the materials that goes into it. <br /> <br />Howard stated that the current citizens of a community should not <br />have an undue burden for new citizens impacting their quality of <br />life. He felt that the current citizens having to pay for growth <br />is not fair. <br /> <br />Mayer wanted the money raised in a way that is reasonably related <br />to growth. <br /> <br />Sisk moved that Council authorize the Mayor to sign the letter (SEE <br />ATTACHED) dated July 16, 1993, be used as the format to be sent to <br />the Board of Education with the additional language inserted <br />allowing for credit for any land dedication made by developers <br />and/or landowners, so that could be applied to the impact fee, in <br />a way that credit would be received. Seconded by Howard. Roll <br />call was taken. Motion passed by a 5 - 1 vote with Lathrop voting <br />against and Hornbostel being absent. <br /> <br />STALMACHANNEXATION <br /> <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1110, SERIES 1993 - ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF <br />LOUISVI?~m, COLORADO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY - STELMACH <br />ANNEXATION - 2ND READING - PUBLIC HEARING <br /> <br />Griffiths read by title only Ordinance No. 1110, Series 1993, "An <br />ordinance approving the annexation of territory, to be known as the <br />Stelmach annexation, to the City of Louisville, Colorado." <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />