Laserfiche WebLink
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard <br />in this matter. <br />Sandy Sommerfroind, 945 19" Avenue SW, read her prepared remarks and <br />reiterated her five concerns expressed at the August 15, 2000 meeting which questioned <br />the validity of paragraph 21 in the Developer's Agreement, the lack of a question on the <br />petitions, the number of parcels owned by Mr. Cooksey and his signatures on the petition <br />outbalances the actual number of different parcel owners, the proration of the assessments <br />versus the benefit derived, and a portion of the road is already paved as a requirement of <br />the development of the Amoco station. Mrs. Sommerfroind then addressed the two new <br />alternatives before the Board as stated in Ms. Gentile's memorandum of August 30, 2000. <br />She spoke against each alternative and supported her position by showing reasons why <br />each one benefitted the two developers, Messrs. Cooksey and MacMillan, and how either <br />one would be unfair to other property owners. She urged the Board to deny the original <br />resolution and the two new alternatives because the developers should pay the paving that <br />they were required to do by their agreements. <br />(CLERK'S NOTE: MRS. SOMMERFROIND'S FULL <br />TYPEWRITTEN REMARKS ARE ON FILE WITH THE <br />BACKUP FOR THE MEETING.) <br />It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the <br />public hearing. <br />In response to Chairman Adams' inquiry if there was a formula for assessment that <br />incorporates both acreage and front footage to remove the extremes as in this issue, Public <br />September 5, 2000 <br />64 <br />BKII4PG798 <br />• • <br />