1992-01-28 Objections to Special Assessments
'"
"
OBJECTIONS TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
To: City of Albertville and its City Council
From: JOHN GEORGE INC.
Re: Proposed Special Assessments in the sum of $31~086.87
referred to in Notice of Hearing hereto attached as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
The undersigned JOHN GEORGE INC. 15 the fee owner of the land
described in the attached Notice of Hearing.
The undersigned hereby objects to the proposed assessments.
The objections include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1) The property has already been assessed for trunk water
main and is subject to a deferred assessment therefor.
2) The pt~opDsed assessment is cDntt~at'y to action taken by
City Council when improvements were installed in 1988
whereby they determined to assess a portion of the
costs of the water main and the Highway 37 Interceptor,
lift station and forcemain to certain benefitted
properties and to recover the remaining costs by Sewer
and Water availability and connection charges and user
fees.
3) The proposed assessment is contrary to the agreement
between the undersigned and the City and the
Developer's Agreement between them.
4) The property receives no benefit from the proposed
assessment.
5) The proposed assessments have not been made in the
manner reguired by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 and
are contrary to law.
Dated at Otsego, Minnesota this 30th day of October, 1991.
JOHN GEORGE INC.
by
by
Its Pt'es ident
I ts Sect--etat~y
~
Page 2
The city addressed the guest ion of financing for the Highway
37 trunk interceptor, lift station and forcemain and chose
not to finance that project by special assessments since it
would have reguired assessments on all of the remaining land
in the city. This was an action the city was not prepared to
make. They therefore developed a fee schedule which provided
connection charges which would be payable at the time
building permits were issued. The bonds that were sold to
finance that project were issued pursuant to Chapter 444.
The other improvement projects were made pursuant to Chapter
429 and those bonds were to be repaid out of special
assessment proceeds.
~
The decision to purchase the Becker property was not made
until late March 1988 after the city had approved the
preliminary plat of Westwind and ordered construction of the
various improvements under Chapter 429. It was during this
period that we were finishing up the details on our
developers agreement.
Our development concept covered the entire Becker farm and
provided for a phased development consisting primarily of
single family residential, multiple residential. and
commercial. It was expected that the commercial land would
be developed last since commercial development is dependent
on a population base sufficient to make development
economically feasible. The developers agreement provided for
park fees on all of the single family lots (175) and the
first phase of apartments. Park fees on the remaining lands
were to be deferred until later development occurred.
In late April we completed our land purchase after the final
plat was approved, the plans for the improvements were
approved and bidding process implemented. We completed our
negotiations on the Developers Agreement which was executed
on April 27th.
Once the varous 1988 improvements were under way the city
initiated action to secure PCA approval for an expansion of
sewer plant capacity (cf. July 18 minutes). This was a vital
step since it was obvious that expansion would eventually be
reguired to acccmodate the projected population growth.
Page 3
Thet~e was a "meeting of the minds" with the city
representatives that development costs would be deferred with
respect to the commercial land until development actually
occurred. The land was (and is) subject to a deferred Joint
Powers water assessment of $10,175 which will activate when
development occurs. It was then uncertain (and still is)
whether or not the water line along County Road No. 37 would
be utilized in development of the commercial lands. It is
also uncertain as to what extent those lands would be served
by the new watermain along No. 37. These factors all had a
bearing on the decision to defer costs - wherever possible -
until actual development occurs.
An additional factor also applied with reference to the
watermain. We have attached hereto copies of the applicable
Minnesota law as set out in two relatively recent cases and
the authoritative work on the laws relating to municipal
corporations which discusses one of those cases. The law is
clear that the city could make no valid a~sessment for the
watermain alonRNo. 37 unless the commercial land actually
uti 1 i ;;.~es the w.~....tet~ma in.
Recent developments in Albertville have also contributed to
the uncet~tainty of when we might proceed with development of
our remaining lands. The city failed to follow through with
its agreement to seek timely approval by PCA of the needed
sewer plant expansion and now we are faced with a situation
where other developers and the High School are being given
prioity by the City Council for the limited remaining plant
capacity. This places us in a high risk situation since we
are being asked to assume substantial costs even though it is
questionable that there is capacity available for our
pt~ojects.
~.
Page 4
However, it has always been our intention to pay our
improvement costs on the commercial land when it is
ultimately developed. The timin8 of our payment is of
primary importance and the manner of payment is also
significant. In order to facilitate disposition of these
matters we are therefore proposing terms of settlement which
we have attached to this memorandum and we respectfully
reguest your consideration of our offer.
Dated at Otsego, MN
this 28th day of January, 1992
~