My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-05-86 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
03-05-86 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 2:23:16 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:51:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTFS <br />City Council <br />March 5, 19~36 <br />Storm drainage district proposal. <br />Water <br />Drainage Ms. Nardini asked if the County owns the ditches or if the City <br />District owns them. The Engineer replied that the County owns the ditches, <br />(Cont.) but the City maintains them. <br />Voto reported that the City would not be able to make playground <br />improvements and finance them under the storm water drainage <br />district. <br />Voto reported that Juran & Moody has prepared a report showing what a <br />$1.2 million bond issue, a$1.8 million bond issue and a$2.4 million <br />bond issue would tlo to the City. Voto reported that Juran & Pqoody <br />was instructed to maintain a 10 to 11 mill rate and assume a 4% <br />increase in the assessed valuation of the City. <br />Fahey asked if it would be reasonable to try to finance the purchase <br />of the Johnson and Mosted properties under the storm water drainage <br />district. Fahey pointed out that the properties are low land and <br />ponding will be required. <br />Farnham felt that this was reasonable. <br />Voto also pointed out that in 1996 and 1997 the City's bondec~ debt <br />falls off drastically. <br />Farnham presented the Council with his report on $1.2 million, $1.8 <br />million and $2.4 million bond issues. Farnham explained these <br />reports in depth and reported that a 10 to 11 mill rate was maintained <br />and a 4% increase in assessed valuation was assumed. <br />Voto reported that the $1.2 million bond would cover only the <br />improvements that have been suggested by the City Engineer under <br />the storm water drainage district proposal. <br />Fahey asked if any street improvements could be added to this. <br />Voto replied that curb and gutter improvements could be added. <br />Farnham explained to the Council that there is new lec~islation, <br />which he referred to as 3838, under which if bonds are issued <br />for this type of improvement, the City would have to expend 5% <br />of the bonds within 30 days and the rest of the money within 3 <br />years. Also, if the City makes any profit on these monies <br />during the 3-year period, the City would have to turn this over <br />to the Federal government. <br />Voto reported that the City would not have to sell the bond issue <br />until it has a signed contract. <br />Farnham reported that the effective date of this legislation is <br />January 1, 1986, but there are rumors that the effective date <br />Page -3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.