Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page 4 <br />September 26, 1995 <br /> <br />The other areas that were added were the methods of assessments. It <br />explained the three that are proposed which are 1) a unit assessment (every <br />lot would be assessed); 2) an area assessment (a watershed district or a <br />water and sewer service area); and 3) the adjusted front footage method. <br /> <br />Mr. Ulrich explained that the Public Hearing was for the Council and resident's <br />consideration of this amendment to Chapter 202. <br /> <br />Ms. Trude noted there were several references in the Ordinance to areas that <br />have been deleted, so those must be omitted. She also noted that under (h) <br />Drainage Improvements the sentence should read" ...and/or by an ad valorem <br />property taxes.1 (rather than an ad valorem tax basis). <br /> <br />Mayor Linke closed the Public Hearing at 7:15 p.m. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Quick to Approve the Introduction and waive the <br />reading of Ordinance No. 567, Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds View <br />Municipal Code Entitled, "Public Improvementsll, <br /> <br />Ms. Trude stated she does not have a problem with introducing this ordinance <br />at this point because she does feel it is an improvement over what the Council <br />looked at in June. The improvement is that the Council went from a 66% rate <br />to a 50% assessment rate, which creates less of a burden on homeowners of <br />streets that are assessed. Also the sealcoating and patching of cracks was <br />taken out of the assessment and made a part of general maintenance activities. <br />She is upset, however, about the lack of information to the public on this issue. <br />She stated she feels there should be additional .publicity on this issue before it <br />is formally adopted as an ordinance so that the public can know that Council is <br />moving forward with it. <br /> <br />Mayor Linke explained that this issue has been before the Council for a long <br />time. Nothing has changed substantially from what they looked at before other <br />than the items Ms. Trude has addressed, however they were talked about at a <br />prior Council meeting. <br />He stated there will still need to be a notice prior to adoption and then it will <br />also need to be publicized in the paper after the ordinance is adopted. <br /> <br />Ms. Trude stated she would really like to see something in the newspaper or in <br />the next City Newsletter. <br /> <br />Ms. Hankner stated she does not have a problem with publicizing it prior to <br />adoption. She feels however that something needs to be decided by the <br />Council on how they will handle future information. Some type of limits must <br />