Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Randall Schumacher <br />February 29, 1988 <br />Page 4 <br />(9) May a person who has signed a petition <br />against a local improvement withdraw his <br />or her name? If the petition is <br />"presented" to the Council, (how is that <br />done?) before the 60 day period has <br />elapsed, may a person withdraw his or <br />her name prior to Council action? <br />3. Section 8.04, Subdivision 2 and Section <br />303.05 of the ordinance. These provisions are very <br />troublesome. We think that the charter means that if <br />any portion of the cost of the improvement is to be <br />financed by funds raised by general taxation an elec- <br />tion is required to authorize the improvements. On the <br />other hand the ordinance says that if less than 100% of <br />the cost is assessed an election is required. We think <br />the charter must be followed. This means, for example, <br />that if a project is proposed for a state -aid street <br />and the Council for any number of good reasons feels <br />that the state aid funds available for use on that <br />street should be used elsewhere making general taxes <br />the only source of funds for the City's share of the <br />cost an election is required. But Minn. Stat. Section <br />429.051, Subdivision 1, made applicable by the ordi- <br />nance, permits that any part of the improvement may be <br />assessed whether or not state -aid funds are used to <br />finance the project. Thus, the Council will be com- <br />pelled to use state aid funds on the project or conduct <br />an election. How can the voters of the City intelli- <br />gently vote on the appropriateness of the "associated <br />assessment formula" when only the owners of property <br />proposed to be assessed are interested? Again, if the <br />voters approve the formula can any other scheme later <br />be used if that if found legally necessary? <br />4. Section 8.04, Subdivision 3. <br />(a) The word "subdivision" in the second line <br />must mean "subdivisions". <br />(b) What is "all of the evidence on which the <br />Council shall base their decision", and what <br />is the "public record of the proposed im- <br />provement"? The language is so broad that a <br />challenge to the jurisdiction of the Council <br />to proceed with the improvement is rather <br />simple. <br />