CCP 07-15-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

------ --...- Review of Arden Hills Assessment Policy Page 2 e July 12,1996 2. Improvement vs. Maintenance Minnesota State Statutes clearly define benefit to property as it relates to assessments. The City has followed this definition for both reconstruction and overlay projects. The question has been raised about overlays being considered maintenance rather than improvement. Roseville, for example, does not assess for overlay work for this reason and instead funds the activity out of the general fund. 3. When to Hold Hearing Currently the city holds its assessment hearings prior to commencing with the project. Several residents have questioned this rationale and instead support holding the assessment hearing after the project is completed. This would allow the assessment to be based on a specific project cost. This approach, in some cases, may cause the City to bond for projects. 4. Interest Rates The policy does not address the mechanism for determining the rate of interest on assessments. The Council may wish to tie the interest rate to a specific instrument such as a five or eight year treasury note. . 5. Percentages Paid by City The question has been raised as to whether or not the City should pay a higher percentage of - the cost for each project. Currently the City incurs fifty (50) percent of project costs and the benefiting property owner incurs fifty (50) percent of project costs. - Recommendation - Staff recommends the Council consider the current assessment policy and if appropriate assign the review ofthe policy to an existing committee or create a task force for this specific issue. I The Council may also consider whether or not to include related questions on the community survey planned for this fall. I I - .- I I ~