1987.07.20 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I ! July 20, 1987 Drive east to County State Highway #10. The improvement being considered is the surfacing of the above referenced roadway. The engineer's report indicates that project in question is feasible and outlines the design standards as well as the estimated cost of the two roadway sections in question. COUNCILMAN VAIL ARRIVED AT 7:45 PM. Mayor Atkinson suggested that the Homestead Drive project and the project being discussed be combined for assessment purposes. The City Administrator cautioned the Council noting that there are two separate projects, and they,can be combined for .construction purposes.but may not be able to be combined for assessment purposes. Mr. Bob Anderson stated he would prefer keeping the projects separate if combining them would joepardize the Homestead Drive project. If they can be combined without jeopardizing the Homestead Drive improvement, then he would like them combined. The city attorney indicated he would have to check on the assessibility of the projects if they combined. Mr. Johnson stated that the best way to do this project would be to combine both projects by petition of the property owners. Mayor Atkinson asked if the city could initiate the action to combine both projects and drop all action on the separate projects to date. The city attorney responsed affirm- atively. Mayor Atkinson then stated he would prefer moving forward with the public hearings for the two separate projects, and recommended that Mr. Anderson go back to the property owners in this area and see if he can get a petition from property owners having 35% of the frontage on 125th Street, 130th Street, and Homestead Drive for the purposes of combining this into one project. The City Administrator noted that combining the projects would add an additional $36,000 to the project's assessment, and there would be only four additional property owners to share in the expense. Mr. Anderson stated he would again meet with property owners on Homestead Drive to discuss the additional expense versus getting 125th Street improved. Atkinson made motion, Peltier seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION 1987-39, A RESOLUTION CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT FOR HOMESTEAD DRIVE/SUNSET LAKE BITUMINOUS SURFACING PROJECT 1987-25. All aye. Motion Carried. Atkinson made motion, Olson seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION 1987-40, A RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT FOR 125TH STREET AND 130TH STREET/ SUNSET LAKE STREET PROJECT 1987-28. VOTING AYE: Potts, Olson, Vail, Atkinson VOTING NAY: Peltier Motion Carried. 8.B Authorization to Appeal Tax Levy Limit The City of Hugo received a notice from the League of Minnesota Cities regarding the status of 1988 tax levy limits and the appeals process from recent state legis- lation. Even though the city has not been notified of its maximum tax levy permissible or local government aid allocation for 1988, the state has put a time limit of August 14th for requesting authorization to exceed the 3% tax levy limit. The time limits and justification for an appeal has been made so difficult to comply with that it is unlikely many cities will be able to get approval to exceed the 3% levy limit. In that the City of Hugo did not receive its budgeted homestead credit in 1984, 1985, and 1986, our tax levy base is significantly lower than originally proposed making it extremely difficult to fund any additional needed