Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 24~ 1993 <br />information, the assessment rate becomes $44.28 per <br />foot. In considering this information, the City <br />Administrator suggested that looking at a rate in the <br />neighborhood of $45.00 per front foot for a 32 foot <br />wide street and $43 per front foot for a 30 foot wide <br />street. <br />Pedersen pointed out that appraising is not a <br />scientific process and suggested that perhaps the City <br />should have the opinion of two or three appraisers on <br />what amount of assessment oan be supported on a <br />benefits received basis. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the appraiser <br />making the recommendation has been used by the City in <br />a number of improvements as well as condemnations. The <br />Administrator reported that the appraiser realizes that <br />the recommendation that he is giving would have to be <br />defended in court should an assessment be appealed. <br />Pedersen stated that he would like to see more opinions <br />on this. Pedersen pointed out that an assessment of <br />$45 or $50 per front foot is just one appraiser's <br />opinion. <br />The Administrator felt that an appraiser could not <br />establish a uniform rate as there are many variables <br />that come into play in a project and in determininq <br />benefits received. The Administrator also pointed out <br />that not only the appraiser's recommendation is being <br />considered, but also what other cities have been <br />assessinq, and the fact that the City had assessed $35 <br />or $36 per front foot in previous reconstruction <br />projects, as well as the costs of construction today. <br />The Administrator indicated that the assessment policy <br />should provide for consistent treatment of property <br />owners. The number used will be somewhat arbitrary, <br />but the issue is what does the Council feel comfortable <br />with and what can the City support financially. The <br />Administrator also pointed out that the assessment rate <br />would have to be adjusted on an annual basis. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the assessment rate must be <br />based on benefits received. Pedersen felt that some <br />structure is needed in determining the rate so that it <br />can be supportable in five years. <br />The Administrator pointed out that the rate would have <br />to be reviewed on an annual basis. The Administrator <br />suggested that perhaps the rate proposed today needs to <br />be equated to some percentage of what the cost of a <br />typical road section would be with a decent soil base. <br />In the future if the cost of a typical road section <br />increases by 10%, then perhaps the assessment rate <br />needs to be increased by 10%. <br />Page 7 <br />