I just finished reading a misinformed letter to the Editor from a former City employee – Keith Koehler. http://isanticountynews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7702&Itemid=68#jc_allComments
The Rail Industrial Park concept plan has a not to exceed $10,000 limit. This plan will need to be done whether or not the land is used for a rail park or a normal industrial park. This land is currently zoned industrial. A not to exceed $20,000 will be used for a facility plan on the waste water treatment plant. Again this is a plan that needs to be done regardless of a Rail Industrial Park. The City is faced with ever tightening standards for our wastewater discharge into the Rum River. We fully expect that in the next few years the standards will be further tighten as has been the pattern the last couple decades. Mr. Koehler additional states the existing plant would be removed – false. The existing plant would be retrofitted to improve its quality of waste water treatment and the ponds would be turned into tax generating industrial land. The retrofitting and pond removal would only be done if we could prove the tax base generated would make it cost effective. I would only want to pursue this project if the City were successful in apply for Federal and State dollars. Therefore his statement that this would cost the taxpayer millions of dollars is completely false.
Mr. Koehler also confuses commercial property with industrial zoned property. In his scheme for new industrial development he would have heavy industrial and its intense vehicle traffic next to a daycare and bank east of highway 65. Terribly destructive planning and zoning such as this would devastate a city. By my count Mr. Koehler has attended three Council meetings recently, one to speak against the Mayoral term being changed to 4 years after this year’s election, next to ask to be appointed to the Park and Recreation Board and lastly the February 3rd meeting. If he had attended the EDA meetings and Council meetings over the years or listened to the years of recorded Council meetings he would have known better than to make inaccurate and politically motivated statements.
If and only if a Rail Industrial Park is deemed feasible would the City ever invest in such a project. We – and other cities - have had businesses inquire of a rail park as there is none in the entire region. These are lost opportunities that would provide numerous good paying jobs and a strong diversified tax base for our entire region. Once the concept plan is completed I hope to share these results with the County and our regional economic development partners so the entire region has a chance to participate in this project. It only makes sense to leverage the information we have to gather anyway and see if we can bring jobs and a strong tax base to our community.
5 comments:
Looks like he is trying to grab some free press so he can get his name out so he can run for office. Goofy he picks this though.
I don't know if anyone reads this but concern expressed by any citizen should be handled with integrity and respect by all elected officials. This response has a biting and condescending edge to it and is inappropriate and unprofessional. Many of us who are affected by the current administration in the City of Isanti applaud the time and effort made by residents to become involved and knowledgable as to City Process. Mr Wimmer, your response indicates that the projects being discussed will not exceed 30k of investigative costs. Since when is that a small number?
Anonymous... Mr Koehler's letter had a number of grievous mistakes in it that were very disappointing especially since I spoke with him after that Council meeting and he choose to ignore the facts I presented to him at that time. I do not believe I ever said $30,000 was a small number... please point that out to me where you read that. What I said was that $10,000 is for work directly associated to determining the future of an industrial park - rail or otherwise - and $20,000 for a facility plan for the waste water treatment plant. The $10,000 is from non-spent budget money for an open economic development position and the $20,000 come from our sewer fund.
Again it is work we will need to do and may get us a chance to get federal dollars.
Mr. Koehler was against this work before he ever sat in on the meeting. He has been against a number of City actions from the time he worked for the City. To ignore his built in bias would not be appropriate either.
Mr. Koehler spent did spend time trying to track down cost for a completely new waste water treatment plant and spent zero time looking at the business and job creation side of the equation.
The first flaw is there will not be a completely new facility... secondly zero general fund (property taxes) would pay for it and we would only do it with appropriate federal and state dollars.
Again none of this will happen if the net tax and job benefits do not outweigh the cost.
I love a good debate on the ideas but a deliberate slanted slam of a project must be answered.
As you said you are already critical of me.... that is fine .. I have many critics... I just hope my critics can put forth ideas to move the City forward instead of just attacking my plans...
oh it has been asked what Mr. Koehler's position with the City was... He was a public works tech and Union Steward during our last Union negotiations...
It is a sad day that after all the work you do for us some people want to complain and smear you George. You are working on City finances on a Sunday. Not sure I would want to be married to a guy that works that hard for no money but as a taxpayer and long time resident I appreciate what you do. Thank you. Please do not go anywhere
Post a Comment