Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />COUNCIL MEETING <br />JULY 25, 1988 <br />hearing the Council did say they did not have a policy but <br />also said the City could pay part or all of the assessment. <br />Mr. Hanson asked if this improvement is being conducted <br />according to Charter requirements. He noted that the <br />residents could have petitioned against the project. He <br />asked if landowners could file a petition against the <br />assessments. Mr. Burke said the purpose of the hearing is <br />to hear input from the affected residents. He explained <br />that the assessment roll has been implied but not yet set. <br />He asked if the property has been improved in market value <br />equal or greater than the assessment? The Council has to <br />weigh this question. If the assessment is protested an <br />appraisal by a real estate appraiser will be made. If the <br />assessment is adopted the landowners have two options; pay <br />the assessment, object to the assessment and go to court. <br />Mr. Hanson asked if the City and the school district were <br />paying their share of the costs. Mrs. Anderson explained <br />that both entities were assessed. <br />Floyd Linnell, 458 Main Street asked why he should be paying <br />for something he did not get. He asked who paid for the <br />curb and gutter when the County widened Lake Drive from Main <br />Street to Luther's Marine. Acting Mayor Reinert explained <br />that the County paid the entire improvement because it dealt <br />with water management. <br />Mary Schleicher, 610 Main Street asked why people living on <br />Bluebill Lane and Aenon Place were not asked to help pay the <br />costs. These residents cannot get anywhere without using <br />Main Street. It was explained that the improvement did not <br />directly improve their property and the City cannot legally <br />assess them. Mrs. Schleicher said that they were using Main <br />Street just as much as the persons living on Main Street. <br />Earl Olson, 1210 Main Street asked why the assessment is the <br />same for everyone even though some did not get curb and <br />gutter. He asked if later curb and gutter is installed, <br />will these residents have to pay for it again? Mr. <br />Stahlberg explained that the assessment was spread on an <br />equal basis, the same as it was done for the 4th Avenue <br />improvement. <br />Patrick Joyce asked why should he pay for curb and gutter <br />when he did not get any on his property. The assessment is <br />on the curb and gutter, not the road itself. Mr. Stahlberg <br />explained that the assessment is on the curb, gutter and <br />PAGE 12 <br />