Laserfiche WebLink
July 26, 1976 Page 6 <br />Councilman Pickar questioned whether rejecting all bids would <br />have an adverse impact on the City? Admin. Achen stated that <br />risk is always there and the bidder's impression of our reason <br />for rejecting bids. Eng. Hubbard indicated the low bidder <br />is aware that this is over the budget for this year, so he <br />thought the bidder would understand our rejecting the bid. <br />Admin. Achen stated letters will be going out to bidders explain- <br />ing the rejection. <br />Eng. Hubbard explained the cost of the repair work was what was <br />out of line. Had the bid strictly been for sealcoating, the <br />bid would have been lower. Councilman Baumgartner questioned <br />whether the maintenance supervisor would be able to provide the <br />manpower for the repair work and not let other responsibilities <br />fall back? Admin. Achen stated the maintenance supervisor was <br />brought in on the staff's discussion of inhouse repair work and <br />is aware of this additional work. <br />Councilman Baumgartner wondered if it is wise to patch and not <br />sealcoat right away? Eng. Hubbard stated new surfacing can <br />wait up to five years before sealcoating. <br />MSP ( Pickar- Baumgartner) that under the advice of the City <br />Engineer that all bids be rejected and bidders involved shall <br />be notified of reasons thereof, as discussed here tonight. 4 ayes <br />Admin. Achen stated that the Rosenquist Addition preliminary plat <br />was on the last Council agenda and Council requested that the <br />plat be redrawn to include the Bonin property to the southwest <br />and negotiate an agreement for handling assessments for Project <br />1973 -4 on Outlot B. <br />Atty. Meyers stated he had researched this item. Outlot B is <br />80' frontage with 60 -70' depth, which is an unbuildable lot. <br />This parcel would carry close to $4,000 of assessments. The <br />danger facing Council now is that by approving the plat with no <br />agreement with the property owners concerning the assessments, <br />Outlot B may go back to taxes and assessments will not be paid. <br />Atty. Meyers listed alternatives for handling this situation. <br />First, the Senior Citizen Deferment - the drawback to doing <br />this is the City would have to establish standards and guidelines <br />for determining hardship which would be applicable to all types <br />of property in the City. Second, Chapter 429.071 allows that <br />when land is divided, Council may on its own motion apportion <br />assessments. Council could remove all assessments from Outlot B <br />and reapportion them to all existing buildable lots. However, <br />this is subject to appeal. Another alternative is a private <br />agreement for deferring assessments over so many years, an <br />agreement to be filed with the land. If the ownersdon't work <br />out agreement with adjacent land owners for creating a buildable <br />lot, after the 2 yr, or whatever period of time, the land still <br />goes back to taxes. Or the Council may choose to not approve <br />the plat until the owners work out an agreement with adjacent <br />property owners. The City has pledged proceeds from these assess- <br />ments to pay off the bond. <br />