1990 Rec./Disb./Resolutions & Minutes

Home Browse Search

Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council of the City of Centerville held their regular meeting on December 27, 1990 at City Hall. Mayor Haberman called the meeting to order at 1:07 p.m, Present: Buckbee, Pelton, Burgstahler, Neumann. Motion by Bursstahler, second by Neumann to approve the minutes of the November 19, 1990 meeting, motion carried unanimously. Motion by Pelton. second by Burgstahler to approve the minutes of the December 6, 1990 meeting, aye: Haberman, Pelton, Burgstahler; abstain: Buckbee, Neumann, motion carried. Motion by Neumann, second by Pelton to approve the minutes of the October 24. 1990 meeting minutes, aye: Haberman, Pelton, Neumann; abstain: Buckbee, Burgstahler, motion carried. Mayor Haberman presented a plaque member Walter Neumann for his service January 1. 1981 to December 31, 1990. of appreciation to Council on the City Council from OLD BUSINESS Proposed reassessment of 1987 Street Reconstruction non petitioners The Clerk/Administrator presented computer printouts prepared by the City Auditor which demonstrated the cash flow to pay the 1987 Street Reconstruction bonds, taking into account 1.) the Anoka County Court order for petitioner properties; and 2.) the possibility of reducing the assessments of the non petitioners. A copy of the printouts is on file with the Clerk/Administrator. It was noted that it is important to decide how the City is going to cover the deficit of the petitioners actions before considering a possible further deficit due to reducing non petitioner assessments. The following audience members asked questions and expressed concern regarding this issue: Maureen Asleson, 7232 Mill Road; Earl Krueger, 1568 Peltier Lake Drive; Kathy Welk, 7219 Mill Road; Donna Erickson, 1548 Peltier Lake Drive; Tom Dario, 1573 Peltier Lake Drive. Mayor Haberman noted that he is not convinced that a 30% reduction to the non petitioners is the magic number. He advised that he does recognize that taking into account the increase in ad valorem to cover the costs ordered by the Court to the petitioners, the non petitioners may be paying greater than 100% of the original assessment. He also noted that he would not consider any reduction unless 100% of the non petitioners were to submit a petition waiving their rights to appeal.