Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-03-26 Min - Board MARCH 26 , 1974 The special meeting of the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District was called to order by the president , Roy Waters , at 7: 30 p.m. in the conference room of the district . ROLL CALL: J. Craig, present; D. Anderson, absent ; P. Sutton, present; R. Anderson, present; R. Waters , present . GUESTS PRESENT: Mr. & Mrs . Norm Traverso, Mr. & Mrs . Oliver Henrik- son, Norm Preston, Lowell Northrup, Mr. & Mrs . Jack ,..e" Guzman, C. S. Gebhardt, Dan Horman, Dave Walling, Norma Jacobson, Ray Smith, Dan Cook, Sierra Sun Reporter. EMPLOYEES PRESENT: Paulus , Kinzie - PROPOSED W. RIVER STREET ASSESSMENT DISTRICT HEARING Dan Cook reviewed the different proposals for the water line instal- lation to provide water to the West River Street industrial and residential area for those who were not present at the last special meeting. Case 1B was an additional proposal based upon a suggestion from Mrs . Salty Gebhardt at the last hearing. This scheme also inclu- ded Dutch Inns of American in the assessment spread as it was pointed out at the last meeting that it would receive benefit from the water line . Mr. Dave Walling' s parcel was also included. Dan Cook explained to the property owners how and why the assessment spreads varied from each individual owner. For a non-looping system, the property owners are assessed an additional $20 ,000 which Mr. Cook explained was a capacity purchase or source and storage for not hav- ing aback-up water supply should a line break. Mr. Norm Preston questioned the large assessments against the property owners on the West side of Donner Creek. He maintained that the water supply was primarily for the industrial consumers and they should be assessed accordingly. Dan Cook explained that the assessment values were divided equally among the property owners as each owner will bene- fit from having the water supply. Mr. Oliver Henrikson stated that he contacted Raymond Vail and Assoc- iates regarding the footage rate to cross the railroad tracks and their rate was approximately $10 to $15 per foot; whereas , Mr. Cook's estimate was $30 a foot. Mr. Cook explained that his estimate was based on an amended engineer' s report, which is in line with the actual con- struction bid for the work which can be as much as ten percent higher than the engineer' s estimate. Mr. Cook went over the additional fees included in the assessment other than the construction amount. They ,are in Case 1 : $13,000 engineering costs 4,000 legal fees 2 ,000 bond printing fees 2 ,000 publication and other costs Depending on what assessment procedure the board utilizes , Nevada County or the Board, will set the fees for the bonds . The County' s fees to conduct the bond proceedings are : $15 ,000 to check the plans 200 incidental filing fees 2 ,600 administrative fees to collect on tax bill 7,000 County fee--they are pledging the County and District to pay off a bond that might not be j paid in any particular year. There is an anticipated $8, 500 bond cis count. Mr. Oliver Henrikson wanted to go on record as being against the j installation of this water line as he could not afford it. Mr. Traverso asked if this proposal is being actively under consider- ation because of developments in the industrial area, and this develop- March 26 , 1974 - Page one Page 85 Discussion . . . continued ment cannot continue unless adequate fire flow is provided. The board told Mr. Traverso that this was exactly why the water line was pro- posed. Mr. Traverso felt that this line was definitely needed in the area for fire flow to the industrial consumers ; but as a resi- dential property owner, he did not feel he would benefit. Salty Gebhardt suggested installing a water line only to serve to the Vita-Bark property, exclude the residential property and the property owners beyond Donner Creek to the West. Although many property owners did not feel the installation of the water line was worth the money, Mr. Northrup brought up the fact that if the water was available from the District , it would enhance the value of the property which would make the installation well worth the money it cost to put it in. A poll was taken between the property owners that were present to see who favored the installation of the water line : Mr. & Mrs . Ralph, owners of Assessment Nos . 1 , 7, 17, & 19 , wrote and stated they were opposed to the water line . Norma Jacobson, owner of Nos . 2 & 3 , was in favor of being included in the assessment district providing she can be served. Norman Traverso spoke on behalf of assessment Nos . 4 thru 9 . He said they opposed the installation of the water line . Assessment No. 10 , Riblet Tramway Company, was not present at the meeting. Cal Gas was also not present at the meeting. Jack Guzman, Assessment No. 12 , was in favor of the water line instal- lation not only for fire flow reasons but also because he felt it would bring the value of his property up. Vita Bark, not present at the hearing, went on record from the last hearing as being in favor of Case 3 , which supplied them with fire flow only. Salty Gebhardt was in favor of the water line installation as pro- posed in Case 1B. Olivery Henrikson, Assessment Nos . 16 , 20 , and 21 , was not in favor of the installation. Although Denny Logging was not present at the hearing, Mr. Norm Preston positively spoke that they were not in favor of the line installation. Their Assessment Nos . are 18 and C . Mr. Norm Preston, No. A, was not in favor of the installation. Dan Horman, No. B, was in favor of the installation of the line. Dutch Inn was , according to Dan Cook, in favor of the line instal- lation. Dave Walling was in favor of the water line installation providing the assessment for his property was lowered as he felt his assessment was too large for the amount of benefit derived. Dan Cook said that a Case 4 would be prepared which excludes all of the property owners that did not wished to be included in the assess- ment district. A petition will then be circulated. Roy Waters wanted the property owners to know that anyone that desired to be connected to the water line that is not included in the original assessment district after the line is installed will have to pay accordingly. He urged that provisions be included in the assessment district of this nature so that later the property owners not wishing to be in the district would not get a "free ride". March 26 , 1974 - Page Two Page 86 Discussion . . . continued It was asked by Mr. Northrup that dual petitions be sent out for both Case 3 and Case 4. He asked this be done because he thought it would allow the additional property owners to sign the petition to include their property should they change their minds and wish to be included in the assessment district. Dan Cook thought this accommodation could be met. There being no further business to come before the board, it was moved by Director Craig and seconded by Director R. Anderson that the meeting be adjourned. All aye; motion carried. The special meeting was adjourned by President Roy Waters at 9 : 45 p.m. TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT BY ROY WATERr P ESIDENT OF THE BOARD RERRIkYN KINZAE., RECORDING SEOUETARY OWN" March 26 , 1974 - Page Three ' Page 87