My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
80-038
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
Resolutions
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
80-038
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:07:22 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 3:46:06 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />normally been computed at 1% and that's the reason the <br />legislature allowed that 1% this last session. <br /> <br />I think the public tonight should not only address the <br />Council on how they feel it should go because these figures <br />are. given to you at 100% and if this were to go at. 100% over <br />20 years, assuming an 8% charge) obviously they can relate it <br />back to their property so if they had 200 feet, $150 times <br />200 hundred would produce the total assessment. If you <br />divide by 20 years you know what the principal would be and <br />add 8% to the full amount. with a declining balance and <br />they know what the assessments would be. If you shorten to <br />15 years or 10, and you would not recommend going 'underlO, <br />but many of the communities now in the last four or 'five , <br />(inaudible) have been going not to exceed 15 years. We . <br />have recommended not going more than 20 if that will make it <br />more palatable if you go' up to the 100%. <br /> <br />The council can get some input from the public, but you <br />don't bind the public. The future Council will make the <br />decision, but I have found from experience that there's been <br />some consensus the future Councils will go along with that unless <br />some real intervening fact presents itself a year from now. <br />A year ago when interest rates were low a lot of the communities <br />had feasibility hearings saying since the law didn't permit you <br />to go over 7% on interest rate money, that it would cost so much <br />and anticipate so much on our bonds, add another 1% and we'd go <br />ahead and issue bonds. They would order the improvement <br />and selling the bonds and everything was so much' higher that's a <br />big intervening facmr that the Council has to take into . <br />consideration' in firming up the final figures as such so the <br />percentage.of assessments, the length of the assessment, of <br />course are two mat ters that we should get some in put from <br />the public on as such. . <br /> <br />NoW, the Council'may'inquire, on what basis do we determine <br />what that split might be. Normally you move toward 100% of the <br />immediate abutting properties more than other people in the <br />general area. But if you feel there's a general benefit to the <br />people in the area you take that into account. J;n spite of <br />what I said, when we have our assessment hearing next year, and <br />you know the people have the right to come up and they have a right <br />to appeal to the District Court, the Council can never assess, <br />even 100% for the full cost, more than the benefits to the <br />property owner. And the benefits have been construed as the <br />increase in the market value of that property. If it's $100,000 <br />today and you give them $100,000 assessment next year, is the <br />property worth $200;000, and that's what we determine at the time <br />of the assessment hearing. If it isn't worth $200,000 because <br />the benefit hasn't gone up that much, then obviously there's a <br />chance for somebody to appeal to the Court. If an appeal were <br />taken - and you decided tonight to have 100% assessments <br />and nothing on general taxes - then an appeal were taken and they <br />could show the property wasn't benefited that much, you would <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.