Laserfiche WebLink
�j <br /> Elk = - Request for Action <br /> River <br /> To Item Number <br /> Mayor and City Council 9.1 <br /> Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by <br /> Work Session May 18, 2015 Cal Portner, City Administrator <br /> Item Description Reviewed by <br /> Street Assessment—John Alfords Justin Femrite, City Engineer <br /> Reviewed by <br /> Action Requested <br /> None, receive information and provide direction if necessary. <br /> Background/Discussion <br /> Mr.John Alfords appeared before the City Council on May 4, 2015, at Open Forum to express his <br /> concerns for the amount of his property tax assessment following the street improvements in 2007. <br /> The city administrator and city engineer met with Mr. Alfords on July 1, 2013, to discuss his concerns <br /> with the franchise fee. Each has had multiple follow-up phone discussions with him on the topic since <br /> the meeting in 2013,which tend to follow each rebate mailing sent to property owners per Council policy. <br /> Our records concur with Mr. Alfords' statements regarding the 2007 assessment. Public hearings were <br /> held in accordance with state law for the street improvement projects. Mr. Alfords did not appeal his <br /> assessment at that time as prescribed by law. <br /> The Council approved a policy for rebating the franchise fee paid by property owners who also paid or <br /> are currently paying street improvement assessments. The Council's intent was to exempt property <br /> owners in the identified assessment repayment period from temporarily paying the franchise fees. <br /> The franchise fee funding program for street improvements was designed to be prospective, collecting <br /> funds for future street improvement projects. <br /> Apartment dwellers frequently pay their own utilities and subsequently are served by the transportation <br /> system thus are intended to fund the street improvement program. Multi-family building owners, under <br /> the former funding program,were required to pay the identified costs of street improvements. The new <br /> funding program places the funding burden on the renters who utilize the streets, not the property owner, <br /> who may have trouble recovering the assessment costs from lease rates because they are market driven; <br /> therefore, a renter would likely not have paid a portion of the old assessment. <br /> Financial Impact <br /> N/A <br /> Attachments <br /> ■ February 5, 2007, Request For Council Action (Public Hearing) <br /> p0WIRED 0 <br /> NA UREJ <br />