My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-10-90 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
10-10-90 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:04:27 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:40 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.
/
23
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 10, 1990 <br />DEVELOPER The City Attorney reported that he has researched the <br />DEPOSIT issue of collection of unpaid development costs, and <br />REIMBURSEMENT there appears to be no enabling Legislation allowing <br />cities to certify uncollected development costs to <br />property taxes. The City could adopt an Ordinance on <br />this issue, however, if contested it may be <br />unenforceable. It appears that the only remedy to the <br />City would be litigation. <br />Fahey asked if the money could be collected through a <br />confession of judgment. <br />The City Attorney replied that it could not since a <br />definite cost amount needs to be identified. <br />The Attorney suggested that the City needs to make the <br />initial developer deposit fee more reasonable. A <br />monthly or bi-monthly auditing of each account is <br />needed to make ce'rtain that when the deposit reaches a <br />certain level, it is replenished. <br />Scalze pointed out that other states allow for user <br />fees to be certified to property taxes for non-payment. <br />The City Attorney replied that those states have the <br />enabling legislation in place to allow this. <br />The City Attorney pointed out that other cities that he <br />is familiar with have higher fees than Little Canada. <br />Blesener agreed that it would be better to charge a <br />higher fee initially and return any excess to an <br />applicant, than to try to collect additional money <br />later. <br />Fahey suggested that the City needed a statement on its <br />application forms indicatinq that applicant's are <br />responsible for consultant costs incurred as a result <br />of their application. Fahey also felt that base fees <br />should be increased and that the City should make <br />efforts to certify to.property taxes any unpaid fees. <br />The City Attorney added that in order to charge <br />uncollected fees to a property, the City must have the <br />property owner involved in the application. The <br />Attorney again suggested a bi-monthly monitoring system <br />to track developer deposit accounts. <br />The City Administrator stated that the City needs to <br />review standard application fees to make sure they are <br />adequate. The City also needs a developer's agreement <br />that sets out terms and conditions and contains a <br />Page 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.