Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 13, 1992 <br />Collova stated that he had trouble with the concept <br />that there was more benefit to a wider lot than a <br />narrow one. Collova pointed out that if a lot was wide <br />enouqh to be split, it would receive a double <br />assessment. <br />The City Administrator agreed, and pointed out that the <br />assessment for the second lot could be deferred until <br />the time that the property is divided. <br />Collova again stated that he disagreed with assessing <br />the improvement on a per front foot basis, and felt <br />that this would pit one neighbor against another. <br />Collova stated that he favored sending a letter to the <br />property owners involved to determine whether or not <br />they favor the improvement. Collova felt that the <br />project should be assessed on a per lot basis. <br />Rada felt that the matter should not be put to a vote <br />of the residents. Rada felt that the Council should <br />consider the input provided this evening, and make the <br />decision. Rada felt that having the property owners <br />vote would only stir up the neighborhood. Rada pointed <br />out that there are wells going bad. Everyone knows <br />that water main will eventually come to the area. <br />Collova pointed out that there are quite a few people <br />who do not feel comfortable addressing the issue at the <br />Council meeting. Collova stated that he would like to <br />hear from those people via the letter vote. <br />A resident pointed out that the residents of the City <br />have elected the Council, and felt that it was up to <br />the Council to make the decision. That resident <br />indicated that if 70% of the property owners oppose the <br />improvement, and the Council orders it anyway, it would <br />be opening itself up for problems. <br />Scalze indicated that if 70% of the property owners <br />opposed the improvement, the Council would probably not <br />vote for it. Scalze felt that a letter asking the <br />property owners' opinion was fine. Scalze noted that <br />in other areas of the City, improvements were not made <br />until the majority of property owners were in favor. <br />Blesener asked if the two improvement areas on Edgerton <br />could be split since there may be varying support for <br />these two areas. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the City will <br />have to determine the cost impact of splitting the <br />improvement. The Administrator noted that the <br />improvement has been set up as one public hearing. <br />Page 21 <br />