CCMIN110981 - Laserfiche WebLink

4. The City will not authorize the use of these assessment district funds for any improvements not substantially described in the original engi- neer's report. Any such improvements would be treated as a new and different project. Second, the levy of the assessment should be tested promptly by a validation proceeding in the Superior Court, and all property owners should be notified to raise legal objections to the assessment at that time. We would ask the Court to make specific rulings insuring the validity of all bonds to be issued in these proceedings over the 10-year period. Councilmember Wood asked what process could be used to exempt properties within the boundary lines that Council determined to exempt. Mr. Brunsell advised it could be done by drawing the boundary lines to exclude the property, or to give the pro- perry a zero assessment. Councilmember Butler asked if the assessment district could be divided into three smaller assessment districts for easier handling. Mr. Brunsell advised that the City would still have to give the same assurances and there would not be any great advantage in splitting the larger assessment district into smaller ones. Mr. Walker presented letters from Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Daon Corporation, Reynolds and Brown, and Stoneson Development Company, expressing their concerns regarding the proposed assessment district. Ms. Marilyn Moorish, representing Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, stated she felt the Kaiser Hospital should be exempted from the assessment district because it is a non-profit organization. She stated that already-improved properties in the Stone- ridge Mall area will benefit from these improvements and she felt they should be included in the assessment district. Mr. Joe Callahan, representing CPS and Associates, stated he felt that all currently zoned residential property and smaller parcels should be excluded from the assessment district. Planning Commissioner Doherty stated he felt consideration should be given to the improvement of Valley Avenue because of increased traffic that will be generated from the other street improvements. Planning Commissioner Getty stated she felt consideration should be given to including improved properties at Stoneridge Shopping Center in the assessment dis- trict. Planning Commissioner Wilson stated he felt there should be a freeze on zoning until this assessment district is accomplished. Mr. Walker presented the report of the Director of Public Works and Utilities (SR 81:398) dated November 4, 1981, outlining the actions needed to be taken by Council relative to this matter. Council unanimously approved in concept the Preliminary Assessment Study done for this project by Mark Thomas and Company dated October 22, 1981. Council unanimously approved in concept the proposed district boundary as pro- posed in the report. 5. 1/9/81