Laserfiche WebLink
Page 6 <br />November 12, 1996 <br />Mounds View City Council <br />assessment amounts that were provided to the residents did not take into consideration the $15,000 which <br />could, per Council authorization, be applied to the project. <br />City Administrator Whiting indicated that he had received three written objections to the proposed <br />assessments (attachment A): Karen Hemesath, 5396 St. Stephen Street; Dean McBride 5450 Erickson <br />Road; James Schmidt, 5446 Erickson Road. <br />Vera Edmond, 2234 Bronson Drive, asked who would be responsible for the cost of the mailbox stand <br />replacements. Mr. Ulrich noted that mailbox stands were made by the city maintenance staff for those <br />boxes which needed to be moved to the North side of the street and the cost will be covered by the city. <br />Mr. Musgrove, 2151 Bronson Drive, stated he feels he has been deceived by the city. He was told that the <br />tree on his property would be saved, however he later found that the tree was removed. He also felt that <br />the the replacement was totally unnecessary. He was originally told that his assessment would be <br />approximately $2,000; he now has a $6,000 assessment. He feels he has been lied to. <br />Mr. Ulrich explained that at the time the pipes were inspected, it was noted that there were leaky joints and <br />roots in the pipes, which constituted replacement. The tree removal was necessary because the <br />construction crews were unable to work around it. The city replaced the lilac bushes and planted a new <br />spruce tree for the homeowner. The original assessment amounts were based on some very preliminary <br />estimated mock assessments, which take into consideration average costs rather than actual surveys and <br />cost bid items. The assessment amounts were revised on March 8, 1996 and posted at City Hall. <br />Adam Grobove, III, 5344 St. Stephen Street, stated he has never experienced a 30% increase in taxes <br />before and this is essentially what has happened because of the assessment. He asked if this is something <br />he can expect to happen again, as it will defmitely determine where he chooses to live. He also asked <br />if the individual apartment units will be assessed as are the homeowners on Bronson Drive. <br />Mayor Linke explained that this is only the second assessment project Mounds View has undertaken. The <br />next assessment project will be the Old Highway 8 project. In regard to the apartment units, it was <br />explained that the individual renters are not responsible for the assessments, but rather the owners of the <br />building, noting that non-homestead properties generally are taxed higher than homesteaded properties. <br />Mr. Grobove asked why businesses are not required to pay a higher portion as they create much of the <br />traffic in the area. Again, it was explained that businesses also are taxed higher than homeowners. <br />Ann Murray, 5414 Adams Street, stated she feels that residents have not been receiving the information <br />that they should. They should have received a breakdown of exactly what would be done in the area. The <br />notices mailed to property owners did not explain that properties surrounding the project would be <br />assessed for the improvements as well. She also stated her concern as to the amount of time that the <br />residents would have to pay the assessments before interest was added, noting that the holiday season is <br />approaching and an assessment at this time of the year is difficult to pay. She wondered where the interest <br />paid by residents goes. <br />Mr. Kesel explained that the city is front-ending the cost of the improvements with funds that would <br />otherwise be invested and earning interest. Therefore, it helps to defray the interest monies lost. <br />