It was a packed Isanti City Hall the evening of Sept. 19 as the Isanti City Council voted to annex 27 properties consisting of approximately 93 acres from Isanti Township.
The land use types are residential, recreational, agricultural and commercial. Property addresses include South Passage Southwest, Fourth Avenue Southwest, Eighth Avenue Northeast, Heritage Boulevard Northeast, Hillock Street Northeast, Palomino Road, Tyler Street Northeast, Tyler Street Southeast, Chaparal Trail Southwest and Madison Avenue Southwest.
However, the annexation isn’t finalized yet. Community Development Director Ryan Kernosky explained in his staff memo that the orderly annexation agreement will now be sent to Isanti Township for their review and either approval or denial within 30 days. If Isanti Township approves the joint resolution, it then would be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings-Municipal Boundary Division, for their review and approval within 30 days.
Kernosky explained if Isanti Township chooses to object to the annexations, the joint resolution would then be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings-Municipal Boundary Division for an administrative judge review. This review would include an administrative hearing. The administrative law judge could, after the hearing, order the annexation, deny the annexation or alter the boundaries of the annexation.
The joint resolution the council approved is for properties that fall within the 1973 orderly annexation agreement between the village (city) of Isanti and Isanti Township. The city provided a notice to all impacted property owners through the U.S. Postal Service on Sept. 8. The city also sent a letter to Isanti Township at the same time indicating the city was going to begin initiating this process.
“As part of the 2017 City Council goals, the city identified annexation of properties completely surrounded by the corporate limits of the city for annexation,” Kernosky wrote in his staff memo. “Many of these properties have been identified as receiving some amount of city services (directly or indirectly), without paying city taxes.”
In his staff memo, Kernosky noted the property owners would not have to hook up to city sewer if their septic system meets the county standards. In the event the private septic system becomes inoperable or no longer meets the standards, the property owner would then be required to hook up to city sewer.
Kernosky explained the same would apply to city water services. If a property owner has an existing private well that meets the yearly testing requirements and health standards, they can continue to use it. But if it becomes inoperable or no longer meets the testing requirements or health standards, they would then have to hook up to city water.
Isanti Mayor George Wimmer read a statement regarding the annexation.
“The city knows that the property owners do not want to be annexed and do not want to pay city property taxes. We understand that nothing we could say would change this,” Wimmer said. “It is also important to know there is nothing that can be said to make the city believe that surrounding properties do not benefit from the city.”
Wimmer stated state statue allows for the annexation of township properties that are at least 60 percent or more surrounded by city property.
“This is an action taken by growing cities, including last year when the city of Cambridge annexed Isanti Township properties,” Wimmer said. In October 2016, the city of Cambridge annexed 32 parcels from Isanti Township, totaling 28.19 acres.
George Hemen, who lives along Palomino Road, asked the Council to table the annexation until more information could be discussed, analyzed and examined and a full Council was present. Council Member Steve Lundeen was absent from the meeting.
“Standing with and behind me are several residents of the township who are very upset about losing their way of life, their land, their land use rights,” Hemen said. “These people moved here for a way of life and many people have enjoyed this way of life for 30 to 50 years.”
Hemen asked the Council if they have spoken and visited with the property owners impacted by the annexation.
“I have knocked on the doors and spoken to most of the families who own these properties. Here’s a consensus to why they moved here in the first place, ‘to live in the country,’” Hemen said. “The majority of these people know they will not be able to handle the financial burden the families will undertake by being forced annexed into the city.”
Hemen said even the smallest financial increase will cause a hardship for some of the property owners.
“Right now, for many of these families, just an extra $50 or $100 a month means the difference of what they can spend on their grocery bill or set aside for retirement or whatever their family budget might require,” Hemen said.
Hemen said the property owners want to stay in the township.
“That’s what country people are all about. They’ve all had their dreams years ago of buying their land and living their American dream in the country knowing they will not have to rely on government other than the local sheriff,” Hemen said. “These are self-contained, self-sufficient properties. In the eyes of the owners, they would never benefit from city services and city control.”