HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 2012-65VIA
.moue, ,�►
CITY OF KENAI
RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -65
Suggested by: City Council
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, CONFIRMING
THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND FIXING PAYMENT ON THE JAMES STREET AND
KIANA LANE IMPROVEMENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held on the final assessment roll for the James
Street and Kiana Lane Improvement Special Assessment District; and,
WHEREAS, Council find the assessment roll is proper.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA,
Section 1: The assessment roll attached to this Resolution is confirmed by
the Council.
Section 2: Assessments as identified on the assessment roll shall be levied
against the properties in the Assessment District and are to be used to repay the
General Fund.
Section 3: Payment of Assessments:
Assessments:
A property Owner with assessments totaling:
• $3,500.99 or less -- five equal annual installments
• at least $3,501.00 but less than $10,000.99 -- ten equal annual
installments
• $10,001 or more --fifteen equal annual installments
When a property owner owns more than one lot in an improvement district, the total
assessment of all the lots shall determine the repayment schedule.
Payment in Installments:
• Installments shall include interest at the rate of ten percent (10 %) annually.
• Installments shall be due on or before February 15 each year.
• Payments shall be delinquent if not received on or before the first business
day after February 15 of each year.
• Annual payments shall be in equal installments, including ten percent (10 %)
interest.
Resolution No. 2012 -65
Page 2 of 2
Delinquent installments will be charged a penalty of ten percent (10 %) on
the entire installment with interest accruing at the rate of ten percent (10 %) per year
on the unpaid principal portion of the installment.
Single Payment:
Assessments may be paid in full without interest if received by February 15, 2013.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 5th day of
December, 2012.
PAT PORTER, MAYOR
S d Modj, City Clerk
/
Approved by Finance:
W
Y
LL
0
U
W
a
J
a
z
a
W
W
Ln
CW
G
a
U
H
5W
V)
N
W
N
N
a
U
W
CL
W
J
O
w
F-
5W
LA
N
W
N
N
a
J
Z
LL
1i
d
O
N
m
M
M
0~
O
O
V
L0
.4
U
CD l
O
N
O
Oi
Oj
W Z
O
O
00
N
V
Ol
O
O
Ol
Ot
F WC
I�
V
N
C
N
ul
N
rl
O
N'
O
ul
V1
vj
CQ
F W
H N
W Q
i/?
i/T
V1
N
iR
V}
VT
V?
VT
VT
W
01
W
O1
N
N
M
�
T
N
H
Q
Q
O�1
Q
Owl
ONt
Obi
Y
Y
t0
Q
D
C
C
Y
Q
Q
N
Q
O
Q
Q
Q
Z
6
N
C
C
N
m
m
N
�
Q
m
N
N
(
m
i
m
m
N
U
v
d
O
Y
Y
O
Y
N
N
N
O
0
7
O
N
W
00
m
m
ti
ti
m
m
m
o
0
a
m
m
m
C
J
cw
C
m
<
06
v
D
w
w
U
U
Y
~
O
U
3
o
c
c
=
m
o
c
li
Y
m
m
vOi
o
Q
C
v
m
m
L
, a
:L
E
N
E
U
u
c
L
u
T
m
O
-
Y
E
C
m
C
m
w
o
JYO
Y
C
YO
YO
O
J
Y
Y
N
N
y
m
O y
9
N
m
N
N
O
O
L m
J
O
O
V
O
W
Z
Z
O
u Q
N
N
Z
O
d
7
J
Q
O
N
N
>
d
9 0
J
m
d
m
d
�
N
�
O
N
w
m
m
>
N
3
N@
'C
'C
N
T
N
J
OmU
C
OmD
C
0
V�
VI
M
C
K C
l7
(�
N
p
N
W
Y
Y
m
m
U
Y
m
C
C
m
M
N
N
N
N
m
}
Y
m
Y
Y
m
Y
m
m
fpm
2
O
0
0
m
.-+
m
m
M
m
It
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
iC
a
v
a
v
v
a
v
v
a
a
MA
" "Village with a Past, C# with a Future //
MEMO:
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794
Telephone: 907- 283 -7535 / FAX: 907 - 283 -3014 II I III
1992
L n TO: City Council
/I/ I FROM: Rick Koch, City Manager
I l DATE: November 29, 2012
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2012 -65, James Street & Kiana Street Improvement
Special Assessment District
The purpose of this correspondence is to recommend approval of the above referenced
Resolution, and to respond to a communication from Mr. Aaron Meyer in opposition to
the assessment methodology.
As you are aware, there are an almost countless number of possible formulas to
determine improvement district assessments. I believe the method employed to be fair
and appropriate. We did not hear anything from Mr. Meyer through the process resulting
in the formation of the improvement district. The estimated assessments were provided
to each property owner at the onset of the process.
The assessment methodology which was recommended by Administration and adopted
by City Council was based on the front footage of the properties in the improvement
district.
This assessment methodology was selected because administration determined it
adequately addressed the following:
1. Common benefit of the improvement to each property.
2. Recognized the cost of the improvement contiguous to each property.
3. Recognized the difference in size of each property.
To some degree the difference in property size does not affect the benefit of the
improvement as long as the use /utility of the properties is consistent. In other words if a
7,400 square foot lot and a 13,000 square foot lot both support or will support a single
family residence, both the use of the improvement and the the benefit to the two
properties is equal
Utilizing front footage as the assessment methodology also recognizes the cost of the
improvement which most directly affects the property.
Front footage in most cases recognizes the size of property, as it does in this
improvement district. The two large lots (26,000sf and 20,000sf), which could be used
for multi - family residences or further subdivided, both have front footage of at least
double the other lots in the improvement district.
Mr. Meyer's property is 6,700 square feet in size; it has front footage on James Street of
110.00 lineal feet, and front footage on Kaknu Street of 67.26 lineal feet. The
assessment methodology employed recognizes that corner lots have potential access
from two different streets. Mr. Meyers property is not assessed front footage for that
portion of his property contiguous to Kaknu Street, and is only assessed 50 %, or for
55.00 lineal feet which is contiguous to James Street.
This information was provided to each property owner at the onset of the improvement
district process, and a public hearing was held by Council to provide an opportunity for
any interested party to comment.
Mr. Meyer has submitted a plan to base the improvement district assessments on the
Kenai Peninsula Borough property value assessment. Borough assessments make for
inaccurate comparisons since we have no control or input to that process, and raw
property is generally significantly undervalued in comparison to improved properties.
In summary, Administration believes the assessment methodology is fair, reasonable,
and an accurate reflection of the benefit.
Thank you for your attention in this matter, if you have any questions please contact me
at your convenience.
W
cu
CD O
L
*' O
�^ s
Gc1 CQ!
i C
1 �
E
O H
D-
o
H
a Ln
Q
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
r
n
n
n
r
n
n
n
n
r
N
W W Q
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W d
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
M
Ol
Ol
Ol
N
m E c
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
v
� O r
m
vi
vi
vi
vi
vi
vj
vi
ui
vi
m
_
n 9 H
n
w �
6 �
Ol
m
M
c o
In
m
In
C
n
Ol
O
�O
l0
t0
O1
M
M
N
d G o y
o
o
v
vi
v
of
ry
o
of
di
n
a li m
o
o
ro
.y
v
m
o
o
m
m
v
m E= a
n
v
In
�o
n
m
N
v
m
ll
ll
E
N
1l1
N
N
O
N
O
Vl
Vl
lf1
M
vai V O
.y
.-I
vl
W aN a LL
N
VT
'V1
N
N
VY
VL
VT
Vl
to
+/F
N
m
Vf
Li
4A
VT
4/t
Vf
N
a/L
Vl
N
V}
« a
t0
N
O1
O
[O
In
M
�l
Ol
r
O1
lO
Ill
n
M
V C �
LD
a
1p
O
n
O1
OMi
M
r
�
O
H
E
m
n
ro
m
In
ti
m
n
n
ro
m
No d
n
a
In
oo
m
m
m
y
a
In
a
E
~
i%1
i
N
vl
N
rV
m
i?
N
V1
4l
I
V1
Wl
Li
to
V!
Vi
aR
N
N
V)
th
V}
N
m
m
lO
O
O
r
m
O
O
Ol
.-.
N
m
W
m
O
O
r
M
O
O
m
.-.
Ifl
O
M
Cp
01
O
O
O
O
O
O
O�
M
�`—,
ai
ai
n
r
n
vi
n
of
of
ai
ai
m
N
C
O
LL
N
lO
N
V1
O
O
O1
tT
O
O
tO
Om
On
H
t0
N
V1
lO
M
r
V
N
N
N
.-I
w
�
ni
a
io
�
aP
of
m'
m
m
ry
H
N
N
r1
ri
rl
M
N
�
O
d
a
d m
a m
a
**
o*
0
0
0
0
o
O
o
a =O
T
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
❑
LL
d
Y
N
Q
o
a
-
0
0
'+
-c
0
0
0
'i
m
o
o
0
0
0
p
r
n
-,
J
ry
0
vl
t
N
N
Q
Sl
.➢
N
¢
d
O
O
❑
�
O
O�
V N
Vl
VI
O
0
w
a
Z
Z
S
Y
❑
y,
m
(L' J
�
m
O
3
3
7
N
SJ
� N
N
�
�
m
3]
L ri
❑
d
m
N
VI
>
Y
LL
LL
N
9�
Q
d
E
E
M
y
"_
¢
VI
d
o 0
c
2' 2
❑
W
in
V1
VI
N
❑
R'
2' O.
O
�
VI
N
0
°
Q
tr
LL
�
a
K
7
v
W
3
S
5
3
V1
J
J
V1
VI
VI
�
V1
V1
�
N
N
IA
V1
2
N
C
�
Y
y
E
Y
E
Y
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
G
L
Y
Y
Y
Y
m
o
o
n
p❑
o
o
.�
o
m
o
n
�o
m
o
0
❑
�
�
om
��i
�
°m
�
°m
°m
o
QO
m
O
U
V1
0
�
W
O
yj
�
❑
V
Y
d
a
O
wa
u
Ij
M
a
❑�
O
C
C
T
a
W
C
Y
C
O
m
m
Y
a
Q
C 2
m
O
M
¢
O
E
Y
Z
E
U
m
S
T
5
«=
E
Q
C
Q
C
Z
ca
'-
75
Vl
o
W
K
Z
3 0
Vl
Vl
Vl
C
W
K
G
fO
VI
W J
d
In
~
M
O
M
[j'
V
tp
tp
K
M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
m
O
M
y
m
M
m
m
m
m
m
M
M
m
fi
WW
2
V
N
N
ti
N
N
N
N
N
rl
'y
In
In
O
�
vl
In
In
vl
In
In
vl
In
In
In
a
Q
a
6
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W W Q
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W d
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
Ol
M
Ol
Ol
Ol
N
E E c `m
n
r
n
r
r
r
n
n
n
n
m
E o L
_
n 9 H
n
w a
a"
Ol
m
M
c o
In
m
In
y
a lY dl
n
m
n
o
a
io
n
n
n
n
n
N
E=
m
m
oo
ro
oa
m
E o 0
I a o
N
W QN a LL
N
m
VT
'V1
N
N
VY
VL
VT
Vl
to
+/F
N
C O
W
« a
O
W
M
r
N
W
LQ
n
O
vl
O
rl
M
�l
Ol
r
O1
lO
Ill
n
M
ry
M
Ol
r
N
O
W
V
Ol
pt
O
N
H
E
m
n
ro
m
In
ti
m
n
n
ro
m
~
W Q 1p
m
i?
N
V1
4l
i/1
V1
Wl
Li
to
V!
Vi
N
m
m
lO
O
O
r
m
O
O
Ol
.-.
vl
o
m
m
o
0
0
0
0
0.
m
�`—.
m
m
n
n
n
vi
n
ai
of
of
ai
d
v
m
v
a
m
In
m
m
m
m
n
N
C
O
LL
Om
On
N
l0
N
Vl
C
N
N
N
'i
w
�
ni
a
io
�
aP
of
m'
m
m
ry
N
N
N
N
rl
N
m
N
N
O
a
a m
o*
o
o
O
o
a =O
T
Z
T>
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
❑
LL
Y
Q
o
Q
N
E
o
'i
m
o
o
0
0
0
p
r
n
-�
.v
0
0
-'
0
0
N
n
N
N
¢
N
❑
�
O
O�
V N
Vl
VI
O
0
w
a
Z
Z
S
Y
Z
y,
LL
N
�
m
3]
L ri
2
d
�
-O
✓1
"_
¢
VI
V1
❑
K
2' 2
li
l7
V1
o
VI
❑
c�
tr
�
a
W
V1
J
J
V1
VI
VI
V1
VI
m
i
y
E
Y
E
Y
E
E
E
E
y
Z
a
m
o
o
n
p❑
o
o
.�
o
m
o
n
�o
m
o
W
N
W
O
O
K
O
N
¢
O
Y
Z
E
U
m
S
T
5
«=
E
Q
C
'
Z
Vl
Vl
G
W
K
Cd
C
3 0
Vl
W J
2
In
~
M
O
M
[j'
V
tp
tp
2
M
O
O
N
N
fG
W
y
M
O
m
O
M
O
M
O
M
O
m
O
M
O
M
M
m
M
a
`
N
rl
'-1
rl
fi
fi
N
N
N
�
p
n
m
m
In
In
In
w
m
In
h
In
¢
a
a