consultants are sandburs

Monday, February 23, 2015

Reader help requested: Ramsey's new special assessment policy is 13 pages long. Devils may dwell in details.

The policy is online, this link.

A reader has indicated I may have misstated something about special assessments, going forward in Ramsey, per that document.

Wanting to avoid error, I request any reader believing my earlier postings may be in error to email, in confidence or on the record however the reader chooses, any suggestion of where error may exist in any posting here about road maintenance and fees, charges, exactions or assessments; each of which after all, is a "tax".

The City's online item arguably is unclear, with specific help needed. Perhaps the main crying need is to assure that nothing in the assessment policy is inconsistent with Charter Chapter 8, Sect. 8.6, protections of individual tax payers; as that Chapter now exists or as it may, in wisdom, be amended in parallel with Minn. Stat. 645.44 provisions about meanings of wording where an intent appears to be to prevent any form of "taxation" of individual homes for sewer/water unless and until the property owner requests connection to available lines - with the Chapter unfortunately only saying "assessment(s)" where the intent is against any charge, fee, exaction, assessment or tax of any kind.

Is there any reader out there who would deny the intent underlying Charter Sect. 8.6, as above stated? If so, please give notice.

____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Well here is something where a key word is "needed" as opposed to "bureaucratically crammed down":

We don't need forced sewer/water, despite Met Council. We don't want it and we need to fight hard to stop a cramdown. Now, or later. It is in the works given that language.

Don't tell me I have to run for council again. Maybe Hendriksen will. Somebody wanting to protect the integrity of large lot single-family homes should be on council. The above kind of ham-handed language offends greatly.

Why is our council doing this to us? We voted them in. We can, as needed, vote them out.

I am willing to vote that way if they cease to listen to us.

What's up?

That language demands amendment, or resort to Charter protective measures, making Charter Chap. 8 homeowner protections 100% absolutely bullet-proof.

There is no time for fixing it better than now.

No comments: