My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Internal memo re sewer connection chg
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Brown Road North
>
960 Brown Road North - 27-118-23-43-0025
>
Correspondence
>
Internal memo re sewer connection chg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 4:23:04 PM
Creation date
1/27/2016 3:10:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
960
Street Name
Brown
Street Type
Road
Street Direction
North
Address
960 Brown Road North
Document Type
Correspondence
PIN
2711823430025
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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).
View images
View plain text
MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: f�Il.l?-960 BROWN ROAl�NOK'1'[I <br /> FROM: 1,IN VI?1?,CI"1'Y(:]J�,RI{ <br /> SUBJECT: SI�,WI�?R CONNI�,C"1'ION C[Ii�RGI? <br /> DATE: lll�:Cl?�iBl?R 3,2007 <br /> During an internal audit of our sewer and water records, it was discovered that a sewer <br /> connection charge of$21,590 was not collected at the time the building permit was <br /> issued in 2002. Although the building permit checkoff list indicated a sewer connection <br /> charge was due, it was not entered into GOVERN (permit system) due to a clerical error <br /> and therefore was not calculated and included as part of the building permit fee. The <br /> property connected to the 97-1 North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Sewer Project <br /> with the sewer permit issued on 10/23/02. <br /> After discussions with City Attorney Soren Mattick, Ron Moorse, Ron Olson, Mike <br /> Gaffron, and Scott Oberaigner, it was determined not to attempt to collect on this charge <br /> due to the following: <br /> • To the best of our knowledge, the current homeowner was not aware of <br /> the charge and would most likely dispute the charge. <br /> • 5 years has elapsed. <br /> • The project was already paid for so the funds would not be applied to the <br /> actual proj ect construction. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.