At the July 27 meeting, the Rushford Council reviewed several items of business and heard from Attorney Mike Miller regarding an ongoing disucssion about the former Rushford-Peterson Schools site downtown.
First up, the council unananimously approved the repealing of the Lodging Tax Ordinance “until further diversification of the lodging industry occurs.” The ordinance was adopted in 1995 as a way to promote tourism marketing and advertising. In the past, up to six lodging entities provided tax funds through quarterly submissions. Now, only two entities are submitting the funds: The Rushford Inn and the city-owned campground. In May, the Economic Development Authority determined it was unfair to subject one business to the tax, which benefits the entire business commmunity.
According to City Administrator Hayden Stensgard, it’s anticpated that the council review any future changes during contract negotiations in November.
The council also deliberated how to handle credit and debit card payment fees at city hall. The city began taking this form of payment for permits and utility billing in April. The city paid roughly 3.5% of payments made in May to Clover, the company it uses to take these types of payments. While some cities take on and cover this cost, others pass on the card processing fees to the customer. The 13 May payments were approximately $3,300. At that amount, just shy of $1,400 will be paid in processing fees.
While, no one wants additional fees, it was noted that by taking card payments, the city is making it easier for residents and businesses to pay their bills. Suggestions on how to handle the fees including taking on the cost as a city, passing the fees on to the consumer, and waiting to make a decision until more data can be gathered. Stensgard suggested the council use data from April through November and review it at that time with the annual review of fee schedules. The council opted to wait and review later this year.
During reports, Stensgard make the council aware that one of the two air conditioner units at the municipal airport broke down. Public Works is exploring options to have a more permanent and efficicent system put in. While he noted he visits the airport at least once a week, the system is turned off if no one is using the building. There are two flight instructors operating out of the airport. Councilor Nick Smith recommended a smart thermostat that can be remotely controlled could be put in to add to further efficencies. While Federal Aviation Administration help fund a significant amount of airport maintenance and operation, the cost to implement a new system would be entirely on the city. More information will be coming at future council meetings.
Lastly, Mike Miller spoke to the council regarding the state of the former Rushford-Peterson Schools site. Miller spoke to the council last August and September and maintains that not only is the site not actually a tax-exempt religious site, as it is classified by Fillmore County, but that it is a public nuisance for several reasons. At this time, Rushford does not have a nuisance ordinance. Miller has asked the city to intercede with owner Mitch Bublitz and declare the site a public nuisance. Miller also referenced the utilization of eminent domain proceedings.
“I feel like we didn’t have anything to do with the sale the first time, or the second time. We’re not in the way of a developer,” said Mayor Leigh Volkman.
“I feel like we should have him [Bublitz] in and have a good conversation and express our concerns as a community,” said Councilor Andrew Linder. “I would hate to come at him with a ball of fire. We should just come with our concerns and see what his plans are.”
Councilor Judi Pronk asked whether a Public Nuisance Ordianance should be discussed.
“That can be a slippery slope,” noted Councilor Jim O’Donnell.
“You’d be asking one of our people at the city to go and enforce things. It’s not a simple situation,” added Volkman.
“What about eminent domain thing?” Pronk asked.
“I don’t want to touch that,” stressed O’Donnell.
“It’s tricky to operate when the city doesn’t have a plan for it. We would have to offer compensation and would have to identify the blight. Once taken over, there would still be compensation to the property owner, and we’d have to remediate before we could sell it to another person,” added Stensgard.
“If that’s true about property taxes that’s one thing I feel we should persue. But, that’s not our job, that was the county,” noted Volkman.
City representatives will attempt to contact the owner for a simple conversation.
Leave a Reply