My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7360
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7300
>
res_7360
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:16:15 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:12:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7360
Resolution Title
Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. UL-81-25 Under and Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications Therefor
Resolution Date Passed
6/14/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />round numb~rs. To that is added costs like tonight - we have to <br />do a study, send notices, have our bond attorney present, have the <br />minutes transcribed, advertising costs - it's an average cost of <br />$500.00, based on our past experience. That is where you get <br />$1800.00. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: Those are all figures that we would have to <br />recognize, but I don't see how it can cost NSP any more to serve <br />electricity.underground than it does above ground. My next ques- <br />tion would be - I fail to see the benefits that vacant lots would <br />receive from this project. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: We are assuming that those lots will not be <br />vacant for too much longer. Having street lights in existence <br />will make them more saleable. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: While waiting for someone to buy those lots, <br />who's paying that monthly share if it1s a vacant lot? If it's a <br />vacant lot, no one cares if there's a light there. I think it's <br />unfair to assess property that is not benefitted. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: I'm not arguing. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: I'm just giving you my thoughts. I'm not <br />against the light - people worry about darkness and so forth and <br />if they benefit from it, that is where the money ought to come <br />from. If the lots have homes on them, then assess them. NSP <br />shouldn't get more money because it's underground either. <br /> <br />MR. HONCHELL: We have no option on that. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: The Council has also expressed those concerns <br />and we've written to NSP. Those things you've brought up are <br />hard for us to understand too. I believe we pay more money for <br />the original connection as well as the $2.00 more per month. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: They begin to look like pigs. <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Is there anyone else that wishes to be heard <br />on the Avon street light? If not, I will close this hearing. <br /> <br />MR. POPOVICH: Mayor, do you want to comment on the vacant <br />lots? <br /> <br />MAYOR DEMOS: Let's assume you want a street light and <br />your neighbor doesn't. Here the people have petitioned for it. <br />It will eliminate a neighborhood feud. The people who do even- <br />tually move in there will know there is a street light and that <br />they will have to pay for it. Just think how peaceful it will <br />be. <br /> <br />MR. REILING: I wish you could settle all argu~ents that <br />easily. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN JOHNSON: How do you feel about the one year <br />assessment? <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.