Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 23, 1990 <br />Scalze asked about the Administrator's concerns. <br />The Administrator stated that his concern would be <br />consistency with other projects where there may not be <br />TIF funds to provide assistance. However, the matter <br />is a policy decision for the Council, and the $11,634 <br />per lot assessment works. <br />Don Pierce, representing his mother Cecelia Pierce, <br />stated that he does not fully understand the process <br />and did not know that any objection to the assessment <br />had to be submitted in writing either at or prior to <br />this evening's meeting. Pierce pointed out that there <br />are older property owners along County Road C who do <br />not understand the process as well. <br />Scalze pointed out that the project has been discussed <br />for the last 2 years and there are no surprises here. <br />Scalze also pointed out that 3 or 4 properties along <br />County Road C have already been divided. <br />Fahey stated that while he does not oppose the $11,634 <br />per lot assessment, he is willing to accept the <br />recommendation of the City Administrator due to the <br />truck sewer project. <br />Pierce was concerned that the property owners along <br />County Road C have to sell their back lots because of <br />the assessment costs. Pierce noted that if senior <br />citizen deferments are granted, interest still <br />continues to accrue and felt the value of the lot would <br />be eaten up. Pierce asked if that was fair. <br />Fahey pointed out that the property owners cannot <br />expect the rest of the taxpayers in the City to pick up <br />these interest costs. <br />The City Attorney reported that if Mr. Pierce wishes to <br />file a written objection to the assessment on behalf of <br />his mother, he can do so at this meeting. <br />The City Administrator provided Mr. Pierce with the <br />necessary document, which Pierce signed on behalf of <br />his mother and submitted to the Mayor. <br />Pierce pointed out that the properties along County <br />Road C were downzoned and there was no adjustment made <br />to these property owners for the resulting loss in <br />property value. Pierce felt that these property owners <br />should receive that adjustment now through a reduction <br />in assessment. <br />Page 5 <br />