Laserfiche WebLink
Memo 485-22 <br />page 2 of 2 <br />result in much, if any, extra Expense for the City. <br />4. Because the County could not show the interest charged <br />each yeas ' -he individual tax statements, the City <br />we-ild need t communicate the interest charged each year <br />:h property with an outstanding assessment balance <br />,is project. This would need to be done P,ery year <br />the assessments were all paid. This cot be very <br />constimina for the City staff. <br />5. If we initiate the alternative A for this project it <br />will make it very difficult to not use it for future <br />projects if proposed by the •ffected property owners <br />(for example Stubbs Bay sanitary sewer. The annvil <br />problem of notification of interest charges to the <br />affected properties then begins to have the pctenlial if <br />becoming very expensive in terms of staff t„ 2 and <br />effort. <br />