Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Minutes <br />September 12. 1984 <br /> <br />Janecek stated that the establishmentof a Special Taxing <br />District would provide a mechanism for on-going maintenance. <br />Would it be worth the city's effort to get that tax levied <br />each year? <br /> <br />City Attorney stated there would only be the cost of pub- <br />lishing and mailing; more of an administrative function. <br /> <br />In response to Proper's question. City Attorney indicated <br />the ordinance establishing the District would be in place <br />until Council repealed the ordinance; one hearing with pro- <br />jected costs could be done. <br /> <br />Schmidt stated that as the homeowners do not have an agree- <br />ment. this public hearing can be continued on the premise <br />that it is yet to be determined that we are going to have a <br />project. We can then go ahead and have an assessment hear- <br />ing or have a hearing on adopting an ordinance on the <br />Special Taxing District. If there were to be significant <br />cost changes. we would have to renotice and hold another <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Council and City Attorney discussed timetable with regard <br />to 3D-day prepayment period. <br /> <br />Ward stated that whether this is a one- or three-year project. <br />the first year's cost would be the same and. therefore. would <br />not be affected by County's due date for monies. City Attorney <br />clarified requirements. noting that if we are obligating the <br />contractor to perform the services in years two and three. it <br />would be part of the total project cost. <br /> <br />Hoel feels homeowners can resolve things within a week or so; <br />wondered about actual cost being less than estimate. how that <br />worked with assessments. <br /> <br />Harcus responded that actual costs would be assessed. <br /> <br />City Attorney stated council could continue this item to the <br />next meeting so that if the contractor and the homeowners <br />reach an agreement in the meantime. and that agreement is to <br />go with the present proposal. action could be taken at the <br />next council meeting. Council could also authorize staff to <br />republish for a hearing on the improvemen~ in the event that <br />staff if notified in time to set a pUblic hearing. for the <br />ninth of October. <br /> <br />Benke asked if the contingency for the second and third years <br />. be simply accommodated by an option to renew at a price- <br />certain with a thirty day (plus or minus) cancellation; and <br />if we decide to renew. then we rehear or reassess or whatever <br />needs to be done. <br /> <br />City Attorney indicated we would have to have a public hear- <br />ing next year to exercise the option. <br /> <br />Page Five <br />