1948-10-28VILLAGE OF MOUND
MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUND VILLAGE
COUNCIL HELD 0ct~b~r 28th, 1948.
Meeting was called to order with a scant quorum in the persons of
Mayor Davis and councilmen Newcomb and Alwin. · Councilmen Pierce
and N~r~kel were absent. Absent also were attorney Wolner ama
Village Engineer Arleigh Smith presenting the staff of p.ertinent specialis~
The purpose of the meeting wac to presen[ a hearing with reference
to the Assessment levy covering water main Project. No. 8.
Mr August Broeckert consulted the council with reference to the
levy against his Lot 1, Blk. 2, Auditor's Subdivision 271, which
had little or no frontage on the water main, yet which was being
services with water. He cited the case of A. J. Malchow, Block 6,
same Subdivision, as being similar to his own. He also presented
himself as a corner lot complainant in connection with his ten-
acre Lot 1, Blk. 12, Subdiv. 271, at the intersection of Watertown
an~ Langdon Road, and that he wac being assessed for more frontage
than he actually owned, in that the frontage assesse~ was~
owne~ by himself and his sister, Mrs. Louise Swensrud. ~.~.~/
J. C. Collins objected to the corner-lot assessment against Lot
3~ at the intersection of Koehler Terrace and'Lake Street, Mound
~ores. He also objected to the water main levy againgt the
Dewey Ave. frontage of the Old Dewey Estate, w~icM ~had ~lready
been assessed along its frontage on Central Ave.
These objections were recorde~ for re~erence to Arl~igh Smith,
Engineer.
Mr. Morris Huff also presented the corner-lot objection on
behaTf of Lot 2, Blk. 8,~ Subdiv. 271, which had become standard
for the entire assessment, and which is recorded in detail elsewhere
in connection with these minutes.
Mr. ParSee put questions with reference to the total cost of the
project, the total foot frontage, and the elements that make up
the cost of $3.1~ per foot, who carries the cost of street inter-
section's an~ of hydrants and what-portion of the whole this cost
represents. These questions could not be fully answered because
of the absence of the engineer. Such answers as were given
are a matter of stenographic record.
Jethro Philbrook objected to the 3~ per foot increase in cost
to him in Brockton, stating that it represented an overall
increase of $200.00 to him, 'whi'c'h represent'ed two thir~.e-of the
total engineering cost of making the re-assessment, which, in
his Judgement, was out of proportion and, hence, unfair. The
gist of this discussion is also a matter of stenographic record.
Mr. Arthur Kane again ad~ressed the council with reference to
the water main levy against Lots I and ll, Blk. 9, Auditor's
Subdiv. 271; Lot ll presenting the corner at the watermain
intersection of Watertown and Dutch L~ke Roads. He objected
to the increase, under the re-assessment, which now came to
$728.9A, an increase over the first lev~ of $122.89, and ~n
lots that had an assessed valuation of $112.OO. He also maas
point of the fact that a portion of the main lay under his
property for which he was willing to give an easement. Kane
VILLAGE OF MOUND
963
expressed the willingness to accept a levy, divided between lots
ll & l, totalling $400.00 plua. T~ie, in hia Judgement, woul~ be
reasonable an~ fair. Nr. Kan~ ~iscussion has been stenographically
recorde~ and is on file.
After hearings, and discussions covering the above, it wac agreed
to consider all objections at the next meeting of the council,
adjoarned, because of the National Election~ to Friday, November
5th, at 8 P. N.
This concluded, the meeting adjourned.
Recorder 1
Attest~
'i