My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-24-2009 Council Work Session Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2009
>
03-24-2009 Council Work Session Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2015 2:52:23 PM
Creation date
7/8/2015 2:52:00 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
196
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
i MINL?TES OF THE . <br /> i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ` <br /> � Monday, March 9, 2009 O <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. � <br /> � (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) � <br /> I � <br /> I <br /> I Murphy suggested the Council review the records in this particular instance and also review the City's <br /> account receivables for that period of time. Murphy stated he does recall discussing this situation in a <br /> work session, with the outcome being that the Council was agreeable to reducing it to the onginal fee of <br /> I $1200. <br /> � McMillan requested Mrs. Feyo put down in writing her version of the facts and the reasons she is <br /> � requesting the waiver. McMillan indicated she would like to see the invoices. <br /> � Mrs. Feyo stated she has never seen an invoice. <br /> � McMillan requested Staff provide a copy of the invoices to Mrs. Feyo so she can review them. McMillan <br /> asked Mrs. Feyo to put down in writing her thoughts and rationale regarding the situation and the request <br /> for the waiver. <br /> � Mrs. Fe o stated she had aske a <br /> y d how many other applications were charced extra fees at that time but that <br /> they did not receive any information from the Ciry. <br /> White commented he does remember a couple of larger projects in that time period that were charged <br /> extra fees. <br /> Murphy pointed out that engineering fees on top of the application fees are applied when the <br /> circumstances warrant the additional cost. <br /> John Eiss, 3445 Crystal Ba, oad, stated he is here before the Council tonight to equest a dock for his <br /> property. Eiss stated he is payin axes based on a lakeshore lot but is not all ed a dock. Eiss noted his <br /> other neighbors with lots similar to have docks and that he is the only or�'e that does not have a dock. <br /> White noted Lot 38 is located in front of thi lot and that this lot is nr�f�immediately adjacent to the lake. <br /> ` <br /> Eiss stated those four smaller lots are city-owned. ; � <br /> � <br /> White stated the City clarified a couple of years ago tha °�esidents who do not have a principal residence <br /> adjoining the lakeshore would not be entitled to a do�`k bu ould be able to swim or launch a canoe from <br /> the city-owned property. White noted that policy,,�ias been up e]d by the City for a number of decades. <br /> White stated in his opinion the issue of paying.t'axes based on a eshore lot is a separate issue from the <br /> dock issue. , <br /> t <br /> Eiss noted his ]ot is classified as a res2clential ]akeshore and that the title to is property says he has <br /> lakeshore rights. �`� <br /> White commented that assessors do not always classify praperties correctly. White ed if Mr. Eiss has <br /> contacted the City previously regarding his request. <br /> Eiss indicated he as not. Eiss stated he does not want to jeopardize his neiQhbors' docks to the ast with <br /> his request. � <br /> White asked whether there are other docks located on the ciry-owned]ots. <br /> PAGE 3 of'8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.