|
<br />VILLAGE OF ROSEVILLE
<br />
<br />Regular Meeting of the Village Council - December 11, 1967.
<br />
<br />The Village Council met on the above date with the following
<br />members present: Mayor Cedarholm, Councilmen Curley, Goodrich
<br />and Grauel. Absent: Councilman Shields.
<br />
<br />Goodrich Moved, Grauel Seconded, that the minutes of the regular
<br />meeting of November 27, 1967, be approved. Roll Call, Ayes (4) -
<br />Nays (0).
<br />
<br />Goodrich Moved, Grauel Seconded, that the minutes of the special
<br />meeting of December 1, 1967, be approved. Roll Call, Ayes (4) -
<br />Nays (0).
<br />
<br />Mayor Cedarholm opened the hearing on proposed supplemental reass-
<br />essment and reapportionment of original assessments for Consolidated
<br />Storm Sewer Improvements Nos. 65-7, 65-8, 65-9, 66-14, 66-15, 66-11,
<br />65-43 and 65-37.
<br />
<br />The Village Manager presented an affidavit shmving publication of
<br />notice of hearing in the Suburban Life on November 15 and November 22,
<br />1967, in accordance with the resolution adopted November 13, 1967,
<br />which affidavit \vas examined, found satisfactory, and ordered placed
<br />on file. The Village Manager also exhibited an affidavit of mailing
<br />notice to affected property owners.
<br />
<br />The Mayor announced that the meeting was open for the consideration
<br />of objections to proposed supplemental assessments, reassessments and
<br />apportionment of previous assessments in respect to Consolidated Storm
<br />Sewer Improvements Nos. 65-7, 65-8, 65-9, 66-14, 66-15, 66-11, 65-43
<br />and 65-47, said original hearing being held October 3 and 10, 1966, and
<br />said assessment roll as amended being adopted October 10, 1966, and
<br />certified to the County Auditor on October 11, 1966. All persons present
<br />were then given an opportuni ty to present oral objections, and all
<br />wri tten objections theretofore filed with the Village Manager were
<br />presented and considered, and all such objections were tabulated as
<br />follows:
<br />
<br />Communications were received from the following:
<br />
<br />LEO K:GOUGH, 1243 Eldridge: Was assessed for four undevelopable lots at
<br />$400 each. He feels two lots were low but the rest were not and should
<br />not have been assessed as 10\'" lots.
<br />
<br />L. J. KOALSKA, 1843 Fernwood:
<br />residential acreage at $260.
<br />$405.90 instead of $460.00.
<br />
<br />Was assessed for 1 lot at $200 and
<br />Thought the assessment should be
<br />
<br />JOlill NISTL, 2063 North Dale Street: Paid his $200 assessment for one
<br />lot under protest. Thought it was not just because they did not have
<br />a flooding problem.
<br />
<br />JOHN WURST, 2389 N. Western Avenue: Because of a clerical error he was
<br />assessed $400 for one lote The assessment should have been $200.
<br />
<br />7: 30 P. M.
<br />
<br />HI N UTE S
<br />
<br />CONSOLIDATED
<br />STORM SEWER
<br />I MPROVE~1ENTS
<br />65-7, 65-8,
<br />65-9, 66-14,
<br />66-15, 66-11,
<br />65-43 AND 65-37
<br />
|