80-044 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . 4 MR. POPOVICH: We're just going to levy the $47,000 against the whole plat, but the reason I brought it up, as those records clear we would have to make those apportion- ment resolutions. My own feeling is - obviously the house is getting some water and sewer now from a previous improvement., but it. does get the benefit of a second stub in case anything happens there and the benefit of the street part and to say that it's not getting any benefit at all, you know you have to stretch it a little because there's bound to be some benefit and it may very well be that you may wish to say we will not assess for sewer and water (inaudible) give them the stub assessment and street assessment and spread the rest equally over the four. But if 'you feel there is no benefit at all,' then it's up to the O'ther four, but that's a fact question you have to resolve in your own minds. If. next week the one comes through where the house is, you have to make a decision if anything goes against. it. If nothing, it's zero to the house and there's no way to pick it up again. I just thought that we ought to discuss it tonight. The land owner is here and the engineer, not that you have to make a firm and fast decision tonight, but by the same token, some input tonight would make it easier a week or two or three from now. MR. DONALD LAMB: I'd like to ask tw.o questions - the property owners or the entire - all those parcels (inaudible) was the one that asked for' the improvement, is that correct, and that included that second parcel. Secondly, isn't it possible that if all of the value is assigned to four pieces of property that anyone of those could bring action when you have already waived it on two and say we didn't benefit that much as four as one-fourth of the total amount. MR. POPOVICH: SO far as an appeal later by anyone, obviously they have to appeal within the statutory period which would be within 30 days from tonight and within 30 days after you apportion it out later, so you have three or four more times that somebody could challenge it at a later point and, of course, that's one of the arguments they could make - is the benefit argument that they're being assessed too much for the benefits that are involved and it's very clear there's some benefit to that property. The trick used to be in the old days where you had a big plat and the land developer would say, assess these and not this. We have had a lot of history in the past wheres the ones that had no assessments sold and the ones that had the assessments went delinquent. As your advisor I have to tell you the worst, and obviously when you overload some lots on benefits and don't give some assessments to the other, if there were a default later on, you're looking for less to get it all from. I don't know if that's going to happen. Mr. Sundburg is here.