06-23-08 PHPRESENTATION TO OTSEGO CC
Mr. Mayor, members of the Council:
I would like to talk to you tonight about who we are, why
we are here and what we are asking for.
We are collectively the Mississippi Riverwood
Associates, Incorporated. We are aANot for Profit
Corporation. The corporation is governed by a board of
directors elected by the members. I am the president of that
board. My name is Perry Edwards.
The corporation has one asset. That is the property
located at 8660 Quantrelle Ave, NE, here in Otsego. Our
property is adjacent to the Mississippi River and is in the
Wild and Scenic River Overlay area and behind the Mn/DOT
sound wall. Which we hope is soon replaced.
Over 90% of our property is below the 100 year flood
plain level and some areas are within the 10 year flood plain.
On this property we operate a seasonal Recreational
115E
a
Vehicle Campground for the exclusive use of our members
and their guests. Our season runs from mid-April thru mid-
October. Our amenities include a swimming pool, a club
house, a mini golf course, shuffle board courts, horse shoe
pits, a common area green belt adjacent to the river, and two
playgrounds for our grandkids.
There are 118 members. Membership includes a lease
to a specific RV site
times only
10% are occupied for the full six month season
20% are occupied 3-5 months of the season
22% are occupied 1-3 months of the season
38% are occupied on weekends and vacation
10% are vacant and or otherwise not occupied
Clearly, to the vast majority of us, Mississippi
Riverwood is our version of that Minnesota dream known as
"The Cabin up North"
Because of Not for Profit status, we can not engage in
--2--
commercial activity or even hold bake sales to raise money.
Our only source of revenue is to assess dues to the
members to cover operating expenses.
Of our 118 members
All but five are eligible for membership in
Approximately 70% are fully retired
That means their only source of income
is SS, retirement plans and savings from a life time of hard
work.
Being retired is a special time in an individual's life. On
the up side of the Golden Years is leisure time, no schedules
to meet, and grandkids to enjoy. On the down side, the
assets you have are it. Be it savings, pension plan
payments or just Social Security. There is no hope of a
promotion to increase your income. No opportunity for a job
change to a better paying position. The best you can hope
for is to maintain against inflation and hope that no
--3--
unexpected expense upsets the delicate balance of your
personal budget.
Our park operating expenses are kept low because of a
spirit of volunteerism within the membership and by doing
most of the maintenance work ourselves. It provides an
affordable place to live and we try to be good stewards of
the land.
The reason we are here
We are here because of the proposed extension of the
existing sewer and water system approximately 1200 feet,
past two commercial lots, to the cul-de-sac in front of our
property, at the end of Quantrelle Ave. We oppose this
project.
A feasibility study for this project has been prepared by
the City Engineer.
The apparent impetus for the extension is that Mn/DOT
will be reconstructing Quantrelle Avenue and these
me
municipal services should be placed under the street in
conjunction with that project.
Doing so will, according to the feasibility study, "provide
substantial cost savings estimated at $340,000"
So why do we appose it?
There are two parts to the proposal -- Water and
Sewer.
Lim
Our campground water needs are supplied by a well
and distribution system to each camp site. The pump is less
than 2 years old and is a state of the art variable speed,
constant pressure unit. The well is at a depth of
approximately 80 feet, in an aquifer not connected to the
river, and provides sufficient flow to accommodate our
needs. We regularly test the water. Most recently the water
was been sampled and tested by Water Laboratories, Inc of
Elk River, a state certified laboratory. It DOES meet or
--5--
exceed State and Federal requirements for safe drinking
water. It is our understanding that city staff has
recommended that we not be required to connect to the
water system. We have no need for the city water.
SEWER
The staff recommendation is to proceed with the
project and require us to connect to the sewer. This we
oppose.
The Feasibility Report splits the cost of installation
between us, an organization consisting primarily of retired
people on fixed incomes, and our neighbor, the 101 Market,
owner of the commercial lots. Our proposed share of the
cost is set at approximately 40% or $109,000.
We strongly oppose the sewer for several reasons.
First, the study asserts that, "this project benefits
the abutting properties." We fail to see how. According to
the Wright County tax assessor putting in this project would
d�
NOT trigger an increase in our assessed valuation. As he
put it, our flood plain property has little commercial value
and since we could flush our toilets before the project and
again after the project is completed, only after we would
have to pay a monthly sewer bill, there would be no increase
the valuation.
Second, the study cites an expressed interest in
municipal services. Mississippi Riverwood has never
expressed an interest in municipal services.
Third, the study describes our septic system as
non -conforming. We understand that our system is a
LEGAL, non -conforming system. It is in good condition,
operating properly and is well maintained. Rotz Septic
Service has routinely maintained our system since it was
installed. Neither Mike, nor Steve Rotz has ever reported
any potential problem areas.
Fourth, the study asserts that by placing the pipes
--7--
under the street the need for easements on adjacent land
would be alleviated. It seems reasonable to us that pipes
could be installed along either side the road at a time when
the services are required for commercial development. The
land west of the street is already designated Right -of -Way
for the 101 highway.
Finally, we oppose this project because it is just
too expensive. It makes no sense to us to spend
approximately 70% of the property's assessed value for a
water and septic system that we do not need and that adds
no value to the property.
This project is a lot more than a couple of circles with
red and blue lines extending down a street on a map. This
Project affects over 200 living beings. It directly affects our
ability to continue to use our campground. It creates a lot of
emotional upset and concern for the future. It would require
taking money from our living expenses to pay for the project
and related expenses. Need I point out that gasoline is
IM
hovering near $4.00 a gallon, groceries are at an all time
t;lOG�1/fiLf1 Con i /P� c�57i¢7C'
high, the market;' in the tank, and the stock market
is struggling as well? On top of that, the inflation factor used
for Social Security and most other cost of living adjustments
does not include fuel and food in the data base.
The $109,000 proposed construction assessment is
just the beginning of the expenses involved with this
proposal. We have had to retain engineers, attorneys,
appraisers and septic experts. Their fees could easily
amount to one half of our annuall budget this year aloneeftr
Then we have the Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee
which comes to $170,950 for the privilege of connecting to
the sewer. We understand that this fee is to pay for sewer
plant and other infrastructure costs. We also understand
that the City Engineer, used a reduced Residential
6
Equivalency numberAin his calculations; and, we are
appreciative that the Council further reduced that number.
EM
However, our research leads us to believe that the
average daily flow used in the study is too high. Our total
water usage over the last four years has averaged
1,640,000 gallons per season. Using the 9,066 gallons per
day projected flow used in the study gives a sewer flow
considerably greater than our water consumption.
Additionally, we are told that the design flow for a
campground with hookups, according to the PCA, is 100
gallons per day per site. Not the 175 gallons per day used
in the study.
But, using the study proposed cost brings our cost to
$280,000 and we have yet to use the system.
We now must modify our existing system (our legal,
properly operating system, I might add) to be able to
discharge into the manhole we are now being asked to pay
$280,000 for. In discussion with the City Engineer a force
main system with 3 lift station was suggested. We have
consulted with the civil engineering firm of John Oliver and
--10--
donations. The director of the center is quoted as saying,
"Between the housing slump and the economy being down,
people just can't get by on what they earn." We assume
that conditions are the same in Otsego as Elk River.
We ask that you NOT approve this project. Don't make
it worse for us.
Please, don't do this. We don't need it, we can not
afford it.
Thank you.
--13--
f
101 Market
Taxable Market Value
2007 2008 2009
$ 372,000.00 $ 626,800.00 $ 884,300.00
($ 1.71 sq. ft. *) ($ 2.88 sq. ft. *) ($ 4.06 sq. ft. *)
Must be up to Estimated Market Value by 2010
Estimated Market Value is $1,144,000.00 ($ 5.00 sq. ft. *)
Sewer and Water will raise Estimated Market Value to $ 8 - $ 12 per sq. ft.
Estimated Market Value
$ 1,742,400.00
($ 8.00 sq. ft. *)
$ 2,613,600.00
($12.00 sq. ft. *)
* Numbers are approximate ( 5 acres @ 43,560 sq. ft. per acre)