Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> MINUTES <br /> <br /> CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> APRIL 12, 2010 <br /> will not be determined until a development proposal is presented for the <br /> Sculley or Battista properties. <br /> Sculley wanted to clarify that his family will not be assessed for sewer and <br /> water improvements through the Battista and I3immelbach properties. The <br /> City Administrator noted that there is no water main improvement <br /> proposed at this time. The assessment to the Sculley property is for <br /> bringing the availability of sanitary sewer up to the property. The <br /> Administrator again discussed the potential to defer the assessment until <br /> the property is developed. <br /> Sculley asked if the assessment would be presented to a developer at the <br /> time they sell their property. The City Administrator indicated that a <br /> buyer of the property can assume the assessment and retain its deferral. <br /> The assessment would come payable at the time the property is developed. <br /> Sculley stated that he did not want to be assessed for utilities that do not <br /> concern his property at the present time. Sculley was hopeful that the <br /> property would be developed in the near futw•e, but indicated that he did <br /> not want to pay for anything that does not touch his property. <br /> The City Administrator noted that a deferred assessment would not show <br /> up on the Sculley's tax statement. He indicated that it is highly likely that <br /> a developer would pay off the assessment, and again noted that the <br /> assessment can be deferred until the property is sold and developed. <br /> Sculley stated that he agreed with the elimination of lift stations and <br /> commended the Council for their planning. He again stated that he did not <br /> want to tell his family that they have to pay a $40,000 assessment for a <br /> sewer line that is not theirs. Again, the Administrator noted that it would <br /> likely be the developer of the property who pays this assessment. <br /> Sharon Sculley asked for more explanation about the fact that interest <br /> accrues on a deferred assessment. The City Administrator explained that <br /> the interest covered the City's carrying cost for the portion of the <br /> assessment that is deferred. The interest is simple interest and does not <br /> compound. <br /> Sharon Sculley agreed with John Sculley's comments that they are not <br /> interested in paying for something that does not benefit them at this time. <br /> Sharon Sculley also asked if the assessment to the Sculley properly can be <br /> renegotiated if the development of their property occurs differently than <br /> what is anticipated at this time. She noted that they have a concept <br /> development plan for the property that differs from what the City has. <br /> The City Administrator indicated that if development occurs differently, <br /> the City can review the facts and make any equitable adjustments. Sharon <br /> 4 <br /> <br />