Laserfiche WebLink
407 <br /> property , and to make specific statement in resolution to that effect . Either <br /> publicly owned property is exempt , or City must commit itself to pay assessment as <br /> distinct from contribution , which would be spread to reduce all assessments in the <br /> District . <br /> Councilman Petersen moved to close the public hearing , seconded by Councilman Rosselli , <br /> Councilman Henderson indicated that it is important to assure property owners in <br /> this District of a new notice when and if the matter comes before Council , as well as <br /> the amount of assessment involved . Attorney Lebsack advised that notice is always <br /> given , but that the amount of money involved cannot be established precisely . He <br /> stated these proceedings are being conducted under the 1911 Act and that improvement <br /> costs will not be determined until after the work is completed , An estimate can be <br /> made , but no assessment spread can be arrived at until costs of the work are known . <br /> There was further discussion in which it was noted that confidence of the property <br /> owners in the area involved might suffer by another termination of proceedings , and <br /> Councilman Arnett suggested that Agenda Item II ( introducing an ordinance to appro - <br /> priate funds to cover City ' s pro -rata share of the construction costs under certain <br /> conditions ) be moved up to assure the District ' s property owners that the Council <br /> did intend to proceed . <br /> Tt was noted by the Attorney that thenanner in which the ordinance is drafted , the <br /> amount of money the City would pay in would be limited to the amount by which publicly <br /> owned property would be benefited by the improvements . Distinction between outright <br /> 'icontributi <br />