My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
197x
>
1977
>
CC_Minutes_1977_0509
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:57:17 AM
Creation date
2/1/2005 2:47:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/9/1977
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />COUNCILMAN CURLEY: These hearings are always very heart- <br /> <br />rending, sitting up in front because you all have good arguments, <br />and the developer has good arguments, and the people have good <br />arguments and they all sound good and you could find yourself <br />changing your mind five times during the course of an evening. <br />Itls unfortunate when a project like that comes that somebody has <br />to pay assessments. It would be nice if you could just charge <br />George Reiling - who has no love for me - and charge him for the <br />whole thing. I would go along with that, but you canlt do <br />things that way. You have to charge the people who will benefit. <br />I know it's pretty tough to understand you have a double lot <br />and you never intend to develop this lot and you say "I bought <br />it for my children". About five years ago I was on the Council <br />and we were bmying land for park pupposes and people said we <br />donlt want to split large lots, and in the south of the city <br />people said "we don't need a park - we all have large lots. <br />We have lots of land for our children. II We turned it down <br />and half a year later they came in and wanted the back lots <br />split so they could sell the, and now they wish they had a park. <br />The point is, itls easy to say "I bought it for my kids and <br />never use it", but you get older, as the man said, and you want <br />to retire, and you look for the almighty dollar and you have <br />this nice lot and you can sell it and you may change your mind, <br />so itls not a total loss for the people who are assessed right <br />now. It hurts - you bet it hurts - with the high taxes and <br />everything. I know how you feel. It hurts to get these bills, <br />but you can spread it over a 20 year period, and those of you <br />who have double lots - in time you're going to be able to <br />sell it and you probably will ma~e a lot more money than right <br />now than you think you can. As far as the storm sewer assess- <br />ments, we all have to face the fact that we have to pay the <br />assessments for stmrm sewers. It started at $250. I paid <br />two - one for my first house and one for this one. But that's <br />something that you have to pay for - the water run-off. I have <br />a lot of sympathy with you and I sympathize and I'm sure you <br />probably won't vote for me, but 11m nor sure 11m going to run. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN GRAUEL: The property Tom was referring to was <br />on Marion Road off of County Road B, and it was an ideal parcel <br />of land. The city could have bought it at a reasonable figure <br />and it had a back-stop on there and a little ponding area, and <br />a grove of trees and I said to Frank Rog, "For about $300 we <br />~ould invest in a back-stop and that would probably be the <br />entire maintenance of that land." People came up - two or three <br />times as many as you have here tonight, everybody voicing strong <br /> <br />-42- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.