Minutes - Council - 02/13/2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

to the feasibility study. The project will be ordered in 60 days as required by City Charter to allow for people to petition against the project. The project will be ordered in April, and that will set into motion the preparation of plans and an advertisement for bids that will be awarded the end of May. The final step of the special assessment project is to hold an assessment hearing where the Council will adopt a resolution levying the assessments. Councilmember Look stated he spoke before the Council two years ago on this very topic. His argument then was that the City should not assess for maintenance issues. Recently, Councilmember Dehen and he attended a League of Minnesota Cities conference for new officials and this issue was brought up. The speaker stated that although it is not illegal to assess for seal coating, the assessment amount should be less than it would cost someone to challenge the assessment in court. Councilmember Look stated he wants to be clear that the roads need the maintenance, but in relation to taxes, the City of Ramsey is one of the only cities in the area that assesses for sealcoating. The question is whether the citizens are already paying this cost in their current taxation; this is his major concern. To assess an amount more than it would be to challenge the assessment in court is the wrong policy. . Minnesota Statute 429 covers the topic extensively and states to assess for an improvement that has no value would be illegal. It is difficult to prove the value of sealcoating. He contacted the Anoka County Assessor who clearly indicated they would not increase the value of property for sealcoating. There is the staff time involved with holding public hearings and getting people to comment on things, and possibly having people upset about the assessments. He suggested it would be better to table the topic and review it, and to determine how to build this into the general fund so it does not need to be addressed every two to five years. Councilmember Dehen stated it should be clear that his position on the matter is not that he is against fixing roads and sealcoating them. As Councilmember Look stated the roads need to be repaired and it is a good thing for the City. His only objection is to the process by assessment; he does not agree with that. Mayor Gamec stated the problem they have run into is that people have a chance to say no to the maintenance and assessment, but they are then charged the full cost of the assessment when it comes up to be repaired or replaced. In reviewing this over the years, in some sense there are a lot of benefits. A lot is learned from the people that come to the assessment hearings. If they stopped this policy right now they would need to stop these projects and the work on some of those streets. The Council could review the policy during the year, but he does not see how they could stop the policy this year; the projects would not get done this year, and if the streets are delayed and the policy is not changed the citizens would have to pay for a brand new street. The policy, in his opinion, has been a good one with the information they receive from the citizens. Councilmember Olson stated she would like to comment on how the benefit of sealcoating and overlays ties to the value of the home. She agrees that it cannot be directly tied to the assessed value of the home but, as a realtor, she knows that if you try to sell a home that has a crumbling street, the value quickly becomes apparent. People will be much more likely to buy a like-valued home with a decent street in front of it, so there are ways to tie it to the value of the home. City Council / February 13, 2007 Page 8 of 25