Agenda Packets - 2011/11/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council October 24, 2011 Regular Meeting Page 3 Council Member Gunn questioned if the Staff time and legal fees would surpass the $2,000 1 difference between the assessment and proposed settlement amount. City Attorney Riggs 2 anticipated the legal fees could go will exceed $2,000 if a half day trial and witnesses were 3 called. 4 5 Council Member Hull asked why the property owner was fighting the full assessment value. City 6 Administrator Ericson stated the property owner feels there were several contributing causes for 7 the leak. City Attorney Riggs indicated the original settlement was less and the amount increased 8 after discussing the matter in full with Staff. 9 10 Mayor Flaherty noted there was street reconstruction in the vicinity of this property less than a 11 year ago. He recommended the Council accept the $5,500 settlement to save the expense of 12 litigation. 13 14 Council Member Stigney felt the issue should be discussed in executive session if litigation has 15 been threatened against the City. City Attorney Riggs clarified that the City was taking action as 16 prescribed under Minnesota Statute 429 as would be done with any special assessment. He 17 indicated that any special assessment may have an objection and further action would need to be 18 taken by the Council. This was the case with the assessment against Robert’s. If the item were 19 to go to suit, the legal and filing fees along with Staff time would exceed the $2,000 difference. 20 He indicated a suit would not be brought to the City of the settlement is accepted. 21 22 Council Member Stigney asked if this issue was handled under the City Attorney’s retainer. City 23 Attorney Riggs indicated if the item were to go to court, the additional fees charged to the City 24 would not be covered under the retainer. 25 26 Council Member Hull questioned if a precedence would be set if the Council were to accept the 27 settlement. City Administrator Ericson did not feel the same set of circumstances would be seen 28 with future assessments. City Attorney Riggs agreed stating each special assessment had a 29 unique set of facts. 30 31 Council Member Stigney was not in favor of backing down from this issue. He felt the City 32 should pursue the full payment of the special assessment. 33 34 Council Member Gunn felt the City should settle on this issue as the legal fees could far surpass 35 the benefit of going to court. She did not see the benefit of a lawsuit. 36 37 Mayor Flaherty indicated this was a unique case. He felt an unbiased opinion provided from a 38 judge, along with the need to find expert witnesses on the City’s behalf, would hinder the case 39 from being successful. He suggested the Council settle at $5,500 and did not feel precedence 40 would be set for future special assessments. 41 42 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Flaherty. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7834, 43 Accepting a Payment as Full and Final Settlement for Disputed Charges for Unpaid Water 44 Service Repairs. 45