05-13-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MIN(ITES OF THE. ORONO COUNCIL. ..4:1,D APRIL 22, 1985, AT THE, ORONO MIUI)LI. SCHOOL AUDITORIUM AT 685 OLD CRYST:.., BAY ROAD - PAGE 13 RESOLUTION #1747 Councilmember Grabek commented on the health hazard in the Crystal Bay area and that sewer is the best approach to solving the problems in the area. Grabek felt a responsibility to the City to order the sewer project. Mayor Butler re -id the proposed resolution ordering the sanitary sewer project for the Crystal Bay area. _.,�ncilmember Grabek moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to adept Resolution #1747, A Resolution Ordering Improvement and Awarding Contract for the Crystal Bay Sanitary Sewer Project 85-1. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). Councilmember Grabek, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to assess all project costs 100% to the benef itting Crystal Bay property owners for the proposed sewer improvements. The vote on the motion was delayed pending further discussion. C'clinc..lmember L. Adams stater' some of the reasons he was in favor of the motion. Adams t tl•, .o matter what option the Counci 1. chooses (50-75-: ) , it long run the City is going to have to pick up a por of t,.e as!• -ssment because of the people who can defer their assessment. Adams also noted that another part of the project will be picked up by the general tax payer because of the appeals process wherein the judge will decide what their assessment will be and the rest n.1st be paid by the City. Adams explained that no matter .hat is decided tonight, the City wi 11 have to pick up some of the cost through the general tax payer. Councilri,ember Frahm .Mated that his preliminary feeling was to asess the project 75% to the ber+--�fitting property owners but in the last 48 hours he !c foun., flaws w., ri that opinion. Frahm fainted out that chc .air market value of the Crystal Bay resicl;-nts wi 11 not rise $10,850 an_ that the people wi 11 probably challenge that number and have it reduced. Frahm felt the project should be assessed 1G0% to the benefitting property owners and let them challenge it individually. Councilmember T. Adams noted that 1. ' 1 support the motion because he believe- that everycr. juld huve to pay for their own sewer. Adams exied * (.._ _ up with a number that would share the assessment w the Crystal Bay residen..s that would solve t _: problem of th- increase in value of the hoiroc. Adams felt that choosing an arh,trary percentage is not , r.:c way t^ -)lve that problem and that a better remedy is tt.rough the .,peal's process a,.d let the judge decide. Coun.-i lmember Grabek explained that he is not happy with tt:r possi.►:lit.y of someone losing their home because of this decision. Grabek felt that the appeals procc-F;s will t�c the best m..-t.h'.xi.