04-22-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M1 NUTI S OE' THE ORO NO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AI'R I L 22, 1985, AT -]'HE OLtONO MIDDLE SCHOOL AUDITORIUM AT 685 OLD CRYSTAL. HAY ROAD - PAGE: 8 PUBLIC HEARING of those assessments is ordered by a public bond issue vote (CUNT.) and if the general public votes against it, the bond issue isn't approved. Weed noted that it isn't the same with the sewer projects. Weed stated that approximately 90 percent of the residents in his -eighborhood voted against the sewer project and et the Council still ordered the project. Weed asked the C ty Council if they would credit the Minnetonka Bluffs area for the amount they are paying for their sewer if they, spread part of the project for the Crystal Bay area over the general tax rolls, or would the Minnetonka Bluffs area pay double. Mayor Butler stated that in essence the Bluffs area would be paying in addition. Newell Weed of 1385 Orono Lane submitted that this is unfair and should not be assessed against non-benefitting property owners. Mayor Butler responded to Weed's comments stating that the City does indeed have the legal ability to assess a sewer project just about any way the City sees appropriate assuming at least 20% of the project is assessed against the benefitting property owners. Butler disclosed that in the past the City has assessed only those affected. Butler noted that the City is only discussing deviating from past assessment policies. Councilmember Grabek responded to Weed's comments by saying that the City has advanced and wishes to hear the comments of the residents of Orono regarding major decisions like this. Grabek felt that the City lets the residents know what the worst could be, so that the residents will come out and participate in City government. Grabek explained that when these difficult decisions come up the City needs all of the residents help, not criticism. Grabek felt that in the last two years, the City of Orono is becoming more and more open to public comment. Hamilton Moran 2965 Casco Point Road asked Mayor Butler to point out the problem that exists if the project is assessed 100 percent against the benefitting property owners. Mayor Butler explained that the option that the affected property owner has is to object to the proposed assessment. Butler pointed out that just about every Crystal Bay resident has objected to the 100 percent assessment f igure which means that object ion wi 11 go to court and the judge w. 11 decide what the assessment should be. Butler disclosed _hat there is a law that states that an assessment may not exceed the benefit to the property. Butler explained that if an assessment of $10,850 does not increase the property value $10,850 more, then the owner has the right to appeal the assessment and then only pays what. the judge decides (fused on an apprai sal of the property) benefits the property. Butler stated that if the judge decides that the sewer only berief its the property