My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-13-93 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
01-13-93 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:33:23 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:54:52 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.
/
14
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 />JANUARY 13, 1993 <br />estimated cost of the project to property owners is <br />$3,800 per lot, although actual costs are higher. The <br />Administrator reported that he was not uncomfortable <br />with that assessment. <br />Scalze pointed out that the City has had a lot of new <br />development occur in the past 5 to 10 years, as well as <br />a lot of development occur 30 years ago. Scalze <br />pointed out that new homeowners are paying large <br />amounts for their homes and high-grade streets in front <br />of their homes. Scalze stated that she was hesitant to <br />make those taxpayers pick up a large portion of the <br />cost for reconstructing older streets. Scalze pointed <br />out that older homes may have had lower prices since <br />they were built on streets that do not meet today's <br />standards. <br />Hanson pointed out that homeowners living on County <br />roads would not be assessed by the County for street <br />improvements. <br />The Administrator reported that consideration is being <br />given to using the closed bond fund, street overlay <br />fund, or similar means for greater City participation <br />in improvement costs. The City will also look at ways <br />to continue to generate money into these funds so that <br />they are not depleted. The Administrator reported that <br />with assessments, his biggest concern is proving <br />benefits received. <br />Scalze pointed out that use of the funds described by <br />the Administrator are still a cost to the general <br />taxpayer. If the funds are not used to bring down the <br />cost of assessments, they could be used to pay off bond <br />issues which would result in lower taxes. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the City's debt <br />drops off dramatically in the year 2,000. The <br />Administrator agreed that in one way or another the <br />taxpayers end up paying, the question is to what <br />extent. The Administrator pointed out that property <br />taxes are a deductible expense, while special <br />assessments are not. The Administrator felt the entire <br />issue warrants further study, especially in light of <br />the major projects that will be done in 1993. <br />The City Engineer reported that the City has been <br />operating under a policy of 80% of the cost of an <br />improvement assessed, and 20% on general taxation. <br />However, in reviewing the individual projects, the <br />split was not 80/20. Items such as restoration, <br />repaving castings, etc. were not included in the cost <br />of the street. The Engineer reported that the City's <br />Page 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.