Laserfiche WebLink
||K“ <br />&liBi <br />K'--: <br />M- <br />it"it,,. <br />Ki,.: ''■iiv. <br />&B <br />m'MUi ' <br />m <br />slsftV.:-liWs^ <br />;-; . ^ <br />MM <br />Mi&nm <br />in. <br />That Petitioners, have filed written objections to the proposed assessment with the City <br />Clerk, Mayor and City Administrator on or before the date of the resolution adopting the <br />assessment <br />IV. <br />That said assessments exceed the special benefit if any, which will accrue to or will be <br />confer^ upon the property of Petitioners, as a result of the public improvements proposed to <br />be made by Respondent. <br />V. <br />That said assessments arc not uniform upon the same class of property, and constitute a <br />taking without just compensation within the meaning of the Minnesota Constitution, Article X, <br />Section I. <br />VI. <br />That the assessments are not proportionate to the special benefits received, if any, by each <br />landowner in the Project. <br />VIL <br />That there is no relationship between the amount of the proposed assessment and the <br />I-; change in market value of the property of Petitioners. <br />vra.Iff <br />mM:-- . <br />- <br />jvi' <br />inaccurate amt not a proper basis for determining the area actually benefitted by the <br />' That the ci neering data used to calculate and support Respondent s proposed assessment <br />I'C..mm— <br />•'"v <br />& <br />I' <br />4fri r#vr. <br />■H <br />m <br />■‘TJ3 <br />li <br />*•.'5 <br />l'/ <br />£i