Laserfiche WebLink
<br />had an existing home on it. That's the way these costs were <br />prepared. For instance, rather than charging only Lot 4 for one <br />water and one sewer and no paving, all the costs in the entire <br />improvement were simply divided by the number of lots. That's <br />the way the developer requested it be done. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: Mayor and members of the Council, the total <br />assessments involved here are $42,232.32. It's 100% assessed. <br />If you divide it between the nine lots, it would be $4,692.48 <br />per lot. This was included in our last bond issue, at which <br />time we received a 7.63 interest rate. Under the new law, we <br />can then charge 1% over that, or 8% under the local improvement <br />code, whichever is greater. So it's proposed, and the recommen- <br />dation of the staff is that the carrying charge be at 8.63%, <br />which is 1% over the bond issue, and that the assessment be <br />spread over a 15 year period of time with the normal rights of <br />prepayment to save interest costs, if they wish. <br /> <br />There were no written communications. <br /> <br />Mayor Demos announced that the meeting was open -for the <br />consideration of objections, if any, to said proposed assessment. <br />All persons present were given the opportunity to present oral <br />objections. <br /> <br />No one appeared to be heard. <br /> <br />Mayor. Demos declared the hearing closed, and Councilman <br />Franke moved that the adoption of the proposed assessment be <br />continued to August 24, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. The motion <br />was seconded by Councilman Kehr, and the following voted in <br />favor thereof: All; and the following voted against the same: <br />None. The motion carried. <br />