My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-22-1985 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1985
>
04-22-1985 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2015 2:41:16 PM
Creation date
4/24/2015 2:41:11 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
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
MIIVUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 22, 1985 , AT THE ORONO MIDDLE <br /> SCHOOL AUDITORIUM AT 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - PAGE 9 <br /> PUBLIC HEI�RING <br /> (CONT. ) $5,000 then $5 , 850 has to be paid by the City. Butler stated <br /> that the City would in turn assess that $5 ,850 over to the <br /> general tax payers. Butler announced that the court costs <br /> then boost the project cost up. Butler stressed that the <br /> ability to appeal the assessment ends tonight for the <br /> benefitting property owners and suggested that those who <br /> have not appealed, and want to, should appeal in writing with <br /> the City Clerk tonight. <br /> Gary Printup of 1261 Bri.ar Street asked if this was to go to <br /> court, what would the legal costs be to the City. <br /> City Attorney Radio responded if there was only one appeal it <br /> would cost the City approximately $4 , 000 . Radio stated if , <br /> however, there were 10 appeals it would not cost $4 , 000 for <br /> each one because he would be using the same data. Radio <br /> explained if all 83 properties appealed then it would cost <br /> approximately $10-15 , 000 . Radio suggested that the 83 <br /> property owners file a joint appeal and that would be less <br /> costly. Radio noted that the legal costs could be <br /> substantial and would be addF�.d onto the project cost. <br /> Gne man asked if the appeal procedure was open to those <br /> general tax payers that will suffer from the procedure of the <br /> assessment. <br /> City Attorney Radio stated no, that the appeal procedure is <br /> only for those benefitting property owners of the sewer . <br /> Councilmember Grabek asked Carolyn Drude of Ehlers & <br /> Associates if there was an opportunity for the homeowners <br /> benefitting by the project to make arrangements for <br /> installment payments on interest only. <br /> Carolyn Drude of Ehlers & Associates stated the assessments <br /> can be paid either in one lump sum immediately or at any time <br /> over a 15 year period without future interest. Drude <br /> explained that the other option is to spread them over a 15 <br /> year period with interest on the unpaid balance. <br /> Councilmember Grabek asked what if an individual cannot pay <br /> the assessment, who would pay for that assessment. <br /> Carolyn Drude informed the Council that the taxes would <br /> become delinquent and go through the delinquency process. <br /> City Attorney Radio stated that the property would then go up <br /> for sheriff ' s sale and become tax forfeit. <br /> Councilmember Grabek asked about the legal precedent on <br /> assuming more than the added value on a property and asked <br /> what is the potential for the court to assess the project 75 <br /> percent because of the inequities that exist. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.