HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTION 1988-15 Suggested By:
CITY OF KSNAI
RESOLUTION 88-15
Legal Department
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, SPECIALLY
ASSESSING COSTS AGAINST THE PROPERTY hOCATED AT hOT 6, BLOCK 6,
HOMMSEN SUBDIVISION NO. 2, WITHIN THE CITY OF KENAI AND RECORDING
SUCH ASSESSMENT ON THE ASSESSMENT ROhh.
WHEREAS, an apartment building located on Lot 6, Block 6, Mommsen
Subdivision No. 2, within the City of Kenai, burned and became a
public nuisance; and,
WHEREAS, the owners of record of the property refused arid
neglected to take appropriate action to abate said nuisance; and,
WHEREAS, the City expended funds in the amount of $5,800 in
conformance with the Uniform Code for the Abatement oE Dangerous
Buildings adopted by the City of Kenai to abate the building.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOBVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENAI, ALASKA, that charges in the amount of $5,800 shall be
assessed against the property located at Lot 6, Block 6, Mommsen
Subdivision No. 2 and that assessment is hereby confirmed and
recorded on the assessment roll. The special assessment shall
furthermore constitute a lien against and upon the property.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that second
day of March, 1988.
t-Whelan, City Clerk
L_ L-
CITY OF KENAI
mOIqlML~O KINAI, ALAIKA 00011
TO z Council Members
City o~ Kenai
og.r., city torn.y
DATF~- ~a~ch 2, 1988
ltB~
hien on Property hocated at Lot 6, Block 6, Monmsen
Subdivision No. 2, Abatement o£ Dangerous Building
As the Council knows, the City recently undertook to abate a
dangerous building located on the above-=e£erenced property. The
Building Inspector ~ust completed the abatement procedure and it
is imperative to quickly have an assessment placed upon the roll
so that assessment may constitute a lien upon the property. This
matter is being hand-carried to Council £or the reason that we
need quick action to per,eot the City's lien.
The City expended 85,800 to abate the building and to recover
that amount a spec&al assessment lien needs to be placed upon the
property. The Uniform Code £or the Abatement o£ Dangerous
Bu~ldings provides at §905 that a legislative body o£ the
~urisdiction {i.e., the Council) may order that the charge be
made a personal obligation o£ the property owner or assess the
charge against the property involved. It ia the hegel
Department's reconmendation that the Council assess the charge
against the ~roDer~Y ~or the reason that we have been
uneuccesoEul in contacting the present owner o£ the property.
Assessing the charge as a personal obligation o~ the property
o~ner would not likely result in recoupment o£ the City's
expenditure.
I IIII IIIII ~11 I -