Minutes 1966 Jan to June - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

having to pay for street widenings, sewer enlargements and Mater system enlargements that were not a. proper expense of any single development but were generated by the whole. 2. The secondary area of interest lies with the prospective residents and taxpayers of the district. In the course of analyzing the district and the feasibility report recommenda- tions, he found no inherent legal problems with either the engineering or financial aspect. With respect to the assessor, he made the .following comments: (a) The recommendation to establish a district assessor is certainly a legal objective. He stated that this was his opinion as well as that of City's bond counsel from their having explored the question with representatives of both the Legislative Counsel's Office and the Attorney General's office with no apparent problem. (b) There appears to be a general lack of understanding in distinguish- ing the use of an assessor to spread the costs of an improvement work and the County assessor's function in connection with general taxes. The City rarely uses the County assessor's rolls as a basis of spreading costs of a local improvement. Exceptions are the downtown parking district and the three districts for stormwater, water and sewer improvements formed last year, where the areas within those districts were of a fairly uniform degree of development. The norrlal basis for spreading the costs of local improvements is by a geographical. basis. For example, in the recently completed Shepard Way Improvement dis- trict, each lot received a fairly uniform assessment tax although there are extreme variations in assessed values on the County assessor's rolls. He stated in his opinion, the use of a county assessment roll that does not reflect the benefits being received by developed land would be improper and would subject the Council to criticism from the pros- pective taxpayers in the district. 3. The third area of concern lies with the owner -developer himself. As any property owner does, he had the right to the beneficial use of his property and the right to develop it. The problem is how to secure the best advantages for the general public while still not depriving the property owner of his land. The use of the district approach in his opinion provides an excellent format for working out this balance. In summary, the City Attorney stated it is his opinion that the legal. proceedings for the district, its formation and bond sales,are unquestionably valid and he recommends that the Council proceed. In summary, City Manager remarked Council had taken all conceivable steps as to procedure in forming of safeguards, guidelines, and controls to protect the public's interest, outlining the qualifications of each of City's consultants, and the studies which had been conducted by these firms. He stated the conclusion of all these consultants is unanimous that the project is legal, the project is feasible, and the project is beneficial. He therefore made the following statements without reservation. . 1. That the City Council accept the feasibility and engineering Planning reports, its conclusions and recommendations; 2. That the City Council reauthorize sale of series A Bonds for reclamation and general facilities. He then presented to the Council his recommendations in writing. After further questioning by Council on certain points and requests for clarifica- tion, Councilman Weymouth moved to adopt RESOLUTION N0. 4933 ACCEPTING FEtASTBIL.ITY AND ENGINEERING PLANNING REPORT FOR GENERAL TMPROVENIENT DISTRICT NO. 1-64, AND ESTABLISHING FINANCIAL POLICY IN CONNECTION WITH SAID DISTRICT, seconded by Councilman Granger and carried unanimously on roll call vote. Councilman Herkner moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 49�A PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE ,ND SALE: OF t1,150,000 PRINCIPAL Alv1OUNT OF "REDi,T00D CITY GENERAL IMPROVEI)ENT