Ordinance No. 20183 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

such as requiring that notice of the existence of the local improvement district be made a part of the deeds of all the properties within the local improvement district might increase the chances of notice, but such a requirement would create endless confusion after the improvement was finished and the local improvement district dissolved after final assessment. In short, there does not seem to be much more that the City can da. If developers choose to create the 1oca1 improvement district and then sell the properties without providing notice and without making some sort of provision for an escrow account holding the money to pay for the improvement, the City will continue to be the subject of complaints from new property owners. It appears that the property owners understand that the best target of their ire should be the previous property owner who knew of the local improvement district and therefore of the pending assessment and chose not to inform the new buyers. They have focused their complaints on the City because the City has completed the assessment process as it has been established. This project has been completed, and has provided the property owners with the improvements that were planned for the area. While the present property owner's ob jections are understandable and deserve recognition, these objections should not deter the completion of the improvement process. The assessment process of the property owners in place when the project is completed is the means that the City has established to pass the cost of the improvement onto the properties and the owners of the property that derives the benefit from the improvement. Under state law, and practically, there is no other way for the City to use the assessment process to cover the cost of local improvements. FINDINGS AND RECUMMENDATIUN Notice of the public hearing was provided and all the property owners were given an opportunity to participate in the hearings. Property owners who will bear the cost for the proposed improvements were notified of the planned November 17,1999, public hearing with the hearings official and the City Council session to levy the final assessment. Letters informing property owners of the hearing and anticipated Council action date and notification to property owners of the intent of the City to characterize the assessment as an assessment, not a tax, as required by SRS 3~5.553~5}were mailed to the property owners. Appropriate notice was given and the public hearing was conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Eugene Code. The Hearings Officer finds that the project is one for which the assessments are for local improvements as set forth in SRS 314.41 o because 1. The assessments do not exceed actual costs; 2. The assessments are imposed for a capital construction project that provides a specific benefit for a specific property or rectifies a problem caused by a specific property STREET PAVING, CURBS, GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS WASTEWATER, ST4RMWATER, STREET LIGHTS AND STREET TREES flN AVALGN STREET FOR 2,700 FEET WEST aF TERRY STREET FINAL ASSESSMENT Page 3