Council splits SAD, delays action on Unit 17 for 60 days

Continued from Page 1

By placing Unit 17 in the newly created SAD-7B, the council is giving city staff and Wilson and Company, the engineering firm hired to do the initial work on the controversial plan, two more months to evaluate and possibly rework the $70 million flood control proposal that grew from citizen complaints after summer monsoons flooded many areas of the city in 2006..

Sources tell The SCORE the engineering firm will recommend scaling back the project and will likely leave the Los Rios neighborhood out of it completely. A large majority of residents in that neighborhood have signed petitions wanting out of the plan, and many submitted protest letters in conjunction with the Governing Body’s public on the matter on Jan. 9.

Just how many submitted protest letters is unclear. A report by Wilson and Company identified 67 properties as having submitted protests, but several property owners told the Governing Body their protest letters were not included in the report or on the city’s web site. A map submitted by resident Cheryl Ganch that was compiled by Los Rios landowners shows 63 other properties not included and four misidentified and not included in the proper location.

“Clearly there’s a problem there,” said Robert S. MacLake, a civil engineer who has been Wilson and Company’s point man on the project. “We relied on electronic communications (from the city) to get all the letters. One of the things we’re going to do in the 60 days in the Unit 20 and Unit 17 areas is go back and get paper copies of everything the (city) clerk received, because obviously we did not get everything electronically.”

This, on top of several complaints that notification of property assessments of around $15,000 were not received until after the hearing, prompted Mayor Mike Williams to call for the delay. The council approved the delay by a 4-1 vote, with councilor Marilyn Salzman voting against the delay after a bizarre twist of events where two streets in Unit 20 became an issue.

Councilor Delma Petrulo, who was absent, told The SCORE previously she was in favor of the delay.

By voting to allow other areas such as Unit 10 to proceed in what is now called SAD-7A, the council hoped it was addressing groups that want the SAD to be approved. But in doing so it may cost those residents more money.

MacLake could not confirm or deny that property owners in SAD-7A might pay more -- – or less – than when they were in the larger SAD area.

“Those properties within the contiguous area of Unit 10 will fully fund the improvements that get built within Unit 10,” MacLake said. “Those on Spring or Gazelle road will fully pay for improvements on their individual streets. Those in Unit 16 will pay for improvements in Unit 16. There’s not a cross.”

While the estimated amount of benefits will remain the same to those properties, MacLake said, “The assessment will be recalculated after contracts for construction are accepted by the city. It could be lower or higher, but it cannot exceed the benefit” under state law.

MORE TO COME ON THIS STORY.