Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 00-143-CC�o� oF cav�vT� co�ss�a�xs Grant �aunty, Washangton RESULUTION NTJMBER 2000-143-C� ASSESSMENT RATE FOR �IILLCREST LIGHTINCx DISTRICT FOR 200 � SET AT $1 b.�0 PER PARCEL �-IEREAS, Resolution 93-9-CC appraved ihe formatian of the Hillcrest Lighizng District, and UVHEREAS, the Orde� set forth that the amount of the annual ass�ssment for the LID was to be determined by Publ�c TJtility District No. 2 of Grant County, and W;HEREAS, the current assessment of $18.00 per taxable parcel will more than caver the estimated 2001 charges, �C}W, THEREFC�RE, BE ZT HEREBY RESC)LVED, that pursuant to the Order, the Board certifies to the Grant County Treasurer the assessment rate for �001 will be lo�vered to $16.00 per taxable parcel in RID NO. 93-1, and IT iS FURT'HER RESOLVED that the Treasurer use these figures for the assessment �ate in alI future assessmeni rolls of RID No. 93-1 untii further order of ���e Board, DATED this 14th day of November,2000 ATTEST: �� ! .�� 1 .. �.._1 .�. � -� ��� - :•. � i BOARD QF CUUNTY CUMIVIISSIC}NERS G-RANT CC?UNTY, �UASHINGTQN � � �j �.i f�:��°L �' ����.� Chairman f` • R,J' ✓ `+' R November 13, 2000 TO: GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: DARRYL PHEASANT GRANT COUNTY TREASURE��" RE: 2001 ASSESSMENTS FOR HILLCREST LIGHTING DISTRICT I have received from Jerry Tate of the Grant County PUD the estimated costs for 2001 that need to be paid and assessed on the properties within the boundaries of the Hillcrest Lighting District 93-1 in 2001. The original resolution state that no new assessment will be prepared unless there is an increase or decrease in the annual anticipated lighting costs submitted by the Grant County PUD. Last years assessment rate was set at ($18.00) per parcel for 2000. The anticipated carryover going into 2001 amounts to around $2,136.50. The carryover balance is higher than anticipated due to the PUD's actua12000 rate being less than forecasted (an $15.00 per month savings). Another unknown factor is the City of Moses Lake's annexation in the Hillcrest area. They have yet to admit to what exactly they have annexed which may include some street lights. The PUD has also gotten no where with them on this annexation. Depending on what they annexed, the annual bill for streetlights in Hillcrest area may actually be less. The PUD has informed me of no increases for 2001 for the street lights. Assuming the annexation does not affect our responsibility for paying all street lights and that rates were lower and will not change for 2001, I propose lowering the annual rate per p�ircel in 2001 from $18 00 to $16 00 . Please start the hearing process to decrease the assessment rate to $16.00 for 2001,