HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 [09] Sep 25
j¿jOh
_ J~Lju
I September 25, 1986
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof the City Council for
the City of St. Joseph met to conduct a hearing for the
special assessments for the Wastewater Facilities Project on
Thursday, September 25, 1986 at 8:00 p.m. in City Hall.
tl~mQ~r~ er~~~D1~ Mayor Mike Loso; Councilmen steve Dehler,
Leo Sadlo, Ross Rieke. Donald "Bud" Reber absent.
Clerk/Adm. Rachel Stapleton; City Engineer Joe Bettendorf;
City Attorney John Scherer. A list of interested persons who
attended is attached.
Mayor Loso called the Hearing to order and requested Mr.
Bettendorf to review the project and manner of assessments.
Mr. Bettendorf stated the total cost of the project is
$1,843,822 and the estimated local cost which is to be
assessed is $786,613. The College of St. Benedict and the
Sisters of St. Benedict will share in that with the balance
to be assessed the other properties is $456,228. The College
and Convent have already participated up front with some of
the costs. Their assessment may vary determined by the flow.
He discussed what comprised a unit and how the businesses
I units were determined (by gallons of water used over the past
two years, with a cap at 3 units.)
Question: Steve Dehler- What are the Metro costs?
Answer- The dollars that we had to spend to buy space into
the St. Cloud system. We bought more space than needed for
future development of the City.
Q. Mayor Loso asked that the group be told why the St. Cloud
option was chosen.
A. The cost of it made it the most viable alternative because
MPCA has required the City to control the phosphorus
discharge by 1988 and this was a less costly means than other
proposals.
Q. Elizabeth Doyle-Since the cost is the same for a family of
one as a family of eight, are they bearing a greater burden
of the cost?
A. Each unit needs the facility equally although the amount
of use may be less, the benefit to the property is not the
same as the benefit to individuals.
Q. Marcia Kuebelbeck-At the previous hearing it was proposed
each business would be assessed as a unit and larger users
would pay through user rates?
A. At the Public Improvement Hearing the feeling was to take
into consideration user rates.
Q. Mary Gamades- Why weren't apartments treated as a
I business?
A. They aren't a single business, you have a separate lease
with each unit and will have to pass the cost on to the
renters.
Q. Mary Gamades_Why were we given such a short time to pay it
without interest?
-1 II nr-,
q . <Y"'"
'~ ,¿' i~. I
_ __.= v
A. The Law says you have 30 days to pay it, but you probably I
will not be charged interest if it is paid before it is put
on the tax rolls which will probably be in December.
Q. Why is the interest at 97.?
A. It may be reduced to 87. if the Council wishes.
Q. When will the project be completed?
A. Projected for early December.
Q. Why are we assessed before we can even use the facility?
A. To hold down the assessed cost to you. Otherwise you
would also be assessed capitalized interest.
Q. Dick Taufen- For whose benefit is the oversizing?
A. For growth of the municipal population only, there is no
growth projected for the College/Convent in this project.
Q. Bob Lyon-How do you know that the cost of the project will
not increase and we will be assessed more?
A. Contract is on a unit price with a contingency built in
and we think any possible problem has been dealt with. The
de-watering is in the bid.
Q. When will project be complete and functioning?
A. Should be completely done in Mayor June.
Q. Ed Kacures-What if someone wants to hook on to our line in
the future?
A. No one has the right to hook in unless the City of St.
Joseph says they can. I
Q. What if Pleasant Acres wishes to hook into our line?
A. The City would have to allow it and get permission from
St. Cloud.
Q. Would the same modification be necessary if we had the
same population as ten years ago?
A. Yes. We would have to do it anyway to meet MPCA
Standards.
Q. Do those that developed property have assessments?
A. Those with houses on have the same assessment and any new
hookups will have to pay a hookup charge which is considered
in the costs of oversizing.
Q. Is assessment for every year, and what is the interest?
A. No, for over 15 years at 87. or 97..
At 8:55 p.m. Sadlo moved the Hearing cease; seconded by
Rieke.
Ayes: Loso, Dehler, Sadlo, Rieke.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
Mayor declared a recess.
The meeting reconvenened at 9:05 pm as a special City Council
meeting.
Assessment Roles: Rieke moved to approve the Resolution
ãdõptiñg-the-ãssessment roles for the Wastewater Treatment .
Facility; seconded by Sadlo,
Ayes: Loso, Dehler, Sadlo, Rieke.
Nayes: None. Motion carried. -
Hookup charges: After discussion Dehler moved to readjust the
------ --------
_ _---'-S'Y
,
- - ?:()Ö f'~'
~
,
&iff
~;;(-M ~./!/~
~/-;2~~~?r&
~)-¡ g ~ ;ýf-
~CO--/0f- 4r~ If!. ¿.
/J/ 8~ ¿Pc
. ~
C¡'ð( e AbLe Su
/:2 ô 8I-~ /If) .{ ,£,
/IIL £/~/~#
l/ I:J L~ ~ 2L,
II q t'pd ~£/L..Sj-,
J2~~
II ~
/éŽ.~~~=..Þ~
/t -1~ ~ dw.
J~1 'nk GL,. sE ,~-::;~
~V-Þ~~%6 ~.
15'5' '9"~~ ~_
· __-J-----
:23 y:/í ~,
01 &/~~
£s- e70/ 5.0.>6
£¿ ~~r-
;J'1
9'1 1/7 ~ /Î(/&-- þ~
~1 ~~r
3ô.
Ø-I,
142i7
hookup charges to $700 for sewer taking into consideration
the pipeline and pump station and the existing collection
system, which represents $40 for the existing trunk line
collection system and $660 for the pump station and force
main, and ~⺺ for water hookup charge; seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Loso, Dehler, Sadlo, Rieke.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
AgjºYrn~ Rieke moved to adjourn; seconded by Sadlo.
Ayes: Loso, Dehler, Sadlo, Rieke.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
~-d~
~ 4chm"