2546 ORD CLOSING HEARING GIVEN TO REAL AND TRUE OWNERS OF PROPERTY ABUTTING ON CERTAIN STREET IN COP

Home Browse Search

(e) That upon the filing of said estimates, the City Council did, by ordinance duly enacted on the lOth day of November, 1980, provide for and order a hearing to be held at 7:00 o'clock P. M. , on the 8th day of December, 1980, in the Council Room, City Hall, Paxis, Texas, at which time and place all persons, firms, corpora- tions and estates owning or claiming any such abutting property, or any interest therein, and their agents and attorneys and all other persons interested therein, were to appear and to be heard in per- son or by counsel, and such ordinance directed that the City Clerk give notice of such hearing in the manner required by law. (f) That after due publication of notice as required by law, on the 8th day of December, 1980, at 7:00 o'clock P. M. , said hearing was opened and held in accordance with said ordinance and notice, at which time and place an opportunity was given to all of the above mentioned parties and their agents and attorneys to be heard or offer evidence as to all matters in accordance with said ordinance and notice, at which time the following appeared and testified as follows: Darrell W. Gunn, Director of Public Works of the City of Paris, briefly described the improvements constructed and ex- plained the method of apportionment of the costs of such im- provements between the City and the abutting property and the owners thereof. T. K. Haynes, City Attorney, then pointed out that notice of the hearing had been published in the Paris News at the time and in the manner required by law, and that such contained proposed rates to be assessed against the abutting property and its owners and the estimated total amount of the whole improvement, and that a copy of the notice had been mailed to the abutting property owners. Robert W. Sokoll, City Manager, testified and advised the Council of the respective values of the improvements and the de- gree to which they enhanced the value of the respective abutting property and that, in his opinion, the abutting properties, and each of them, were enhanced .in value by the building of said improve- ments in an amount greater than the assessments against such pro- perties.