Laserfiche WebLink
May 24, 1976 Page 10 <br />Warren Johnson stated that most of the corrective work has been <br />done. The basic question is who is going to pay for the work. <br />If Paster Enterprises decide they don't want to pay for this <br />then the City must assess Paster Enterprises' property. Atty <br />Meyers said that we are assuming we are going to assess this <br />property, but the owner has the right to appeal that. <br />Mr. Johnson then stated that Paster will go to court and fight <br />it out in court. Atty Meyers said that we have no legal right <br />to assess any properties other than the Center. If it goes to <br />court and the city loses, the project cost will go on the <br />general taxes. The developer might agree with the project but <br />still contest the assessments. The courts will make the final <br />decision. <br />Mayor Johnson stated that one of the interesting parts is that <br />we have a petition from the Shopping Center which asks us to do <br />the work in the ditch. Is that still a valid petition? <br />Mr. Frisch stated that he cannot respond to that Atty <br />Meyers said that question must be decided ultimately by a court. <br />L:Ol1IlG ilauaTa <br />m t asked what specifically is Paster looking <br />Shelquist <br />at? At the possibility of volunteering to complete the work. <br />asking Council to complete this plan, or to deny responsibility? <br />Mr. Frisch replied that these issues are all viable. He is <br />considering all of them at this time. Until he confers with his <br />clients,he cannot answer the question. He is only an agent of <br />his client. He can only go so far. <br />Councilman Shelquist asked the scope of that authority. Mr. <br />Frisch stated that he can appeal on behalf of his client but <br />cannot make the final decision. Mayor Johnson stated that I am <br />wondering if you haven't already responded. He read the letter <br />of May 12 to the Council in which Mr. Frisch indicated the <br />developer would sue the city. Mr. Frisch replied that his <br />position has not changed. This is a different matter than we <br />were talking about before. The purpose of that letter was <br />whether or not a court reporter was to be allowed and I do not intend to <br />appeal this procedure. My client is not to be compelled to do <br />anything that is not in my authority. I will digest this with <br />my client and then I will respond. <br />Mayor Johnson asked if he would have physically present a repre- <br />sentative of his client on June 14. Mr. Frisch replied yes. <br />Mayor Johnson asked if he would be prepared to respond at that <br />point to the specific recommendations of the engineering firm <br />of Comstock Davis. Mr. Frisch replied yes. Mayor Johnson <br />asked him if he will be prepared to respond to alternative recom- <br />mendations will he be prepared to state what financial <br />obligations Paster Enterprises is willing to make on these <br />various improvements? Mr. Frisch replied I think so. Mayor <br />