Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 21, 1994 <br />Morelan pointed out that 20~ of the costs would have to <br />be assessed in order for the City to bond. Morelan <br />asked if it were out of the question for the City to <br />finance the improvement costs. <br />The Administrator replied that it would be difficult <br />until the year 2000 dependinq on the degree of <br />activity. <br />Morelan stated that it made sense to him to assess the <br />bare minimum and pay the remaining improvement costs <br />from the general tax levy. Economically that would be <br />the best situation since property taxes are deductible <br />for the homeowner while assessments are not. <br />Scalze was not sure the qeneral taxpayers of the City <br />would support this position. <br />Morelan pointed out that property owners on County <br />roads are not assessed for those improvements. <br />Scalze felt that was offset by the traffic volumes <br />residents on County roads must put up with. <br />Warring reported that he bouqht his home 2 1/2 years <br />ago, and if he had known he would be assessed for a <br />road improvement, he would not have purchased the <br />property. <br />Pedersen pointed out that not assessing for road <br />improvements increases the general tax levy, and <br />property owners complain about taxes being too high. <br />Improvements are either paid for through assessments or <br />the tax levy. <br />Shannon pointed out that property taxes are tax <br />deductible while assessments are not. <br />Morelan pointed out that putting improvements on <br />general taxes results in commercial businesses picking <br />up part of the tab. <br />Scalze asked if that was fair. <br />Mrs. Parrish pointed out that schools do not levy taxes <br />based on the number of children someone has in school. <br />7 <br />