2014-04-23 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville Special & Regular Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 2014 adopting the assessment." Attorney Glaser stated that Council needed to consider whether to proceed with determining the amount of unpaid principal and /or accrued interest necessary to satisfy the assessment debt owed and certify that amount to the County for payment according to the presented table submitted by the Finance Director by adopting the resolution contained in their packet. Attorney Glaser reviewed the presented table with Council and amended that Year 1 of the assessment roll commence in 2015 rather than 2014 with the term of the assessment being 10 years at 5.75% interest and ending in 2024 rather than 2023. Council Member Love questioned whether interest had been adjusted accordingly to their payments and Attorney Glaser concurred. Ms. Julie Douglass, Attorney Representing Sheehy Construction, introduced herself to Council and stated that her client has two objections to paying accrue interest on unpaid principal due to: The City adopted Res. #13 -009 which specifically addresses interest and repayment (February 13, 2013), that "no interest will be charged on any amount paid within 30 days of the resolution and that the City reassessed the Sheehy property in the amount of $249,000 and did not include any assessment for interest between June 10, 2014 and February 13, 2013 and Sheehy paid the February 13, 2013 reassessment amount in full within 30 days. Ms. Douglass' and Sheehy's arguments are that Minnesota State Statutes 429 specifically 429.061, subd 2, subd 3, 429.071, subd 2 and 429.081 address the Courts decision, assessment/reassessment payment in full without interest as in the City's re- assessment resolution and her interpretation of Judge Larson's order and intent. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the judges intent, definition of set aside, at what time does interest being to accrue /at the time of benefit, special assessment law vs. property tax law, and valuation and benefit to property. Mr. Dean Luxenburg, 1697 Peltier Lake Drive, stated that Council has expended in excess of $100,000 on this litigation to date, questioned how much more of his tax dollars they were going to spend and requested Council stop any future action. Mr Blair Juliar, Vice President, Sheehy Construction, stated that the Council has taken bad advice in the past and has lost every time that this item has been taken to court. Mr. Juliar questioned why Council desires to continue wasting taxpayer money and being poor stewards of citizen's money. Attorney Glaser stated that Mr. Juliar's comments were incorrect and that the Courts have found in favor of the City on two occasions and that he is confident that the Judge could not address the interest issue due to the fact that the law is clear. Page 4 of 8 43