Huntingburg Public Works meeting: Street Department begins action to enforce payment for curb and gutter improvements
The Huntingburg Board of Public Works and Safety approved beginning a procedure to force two property owners to pay for curb and gutter improvements on Clay Street.
Street Superintendent Jason Stamm notified the board of two homeowners that were contesting paying for the installation of new curbs and gutters on Clay Street near Race and Tenth Street at the September 2014 meeting.
Stamm stated at the time he might have to resort to the Barretts Law Assessment procedure to finish the curb and gutter project. With the summer construction procedure approaching, Stamm asked for permission to begin that process.
For these improvements, the city splits the cost of such improvements with the homeowners along the improved street. The city pays for the engineering and preparation for the installation of the curb and gutter. The homeowner pays for the contractor to pour the new curb and gutter.
In the case of these two homeowners, one will see a bill for about $1,200 and the other $2,100 at a cost of about $13 per foot of installed curb.
For homeowners that agree to pay for the improvements, they have three choices. They can pay it in a single lump sum, pay it over 12 months with no interest, or take two additional years (for a total of three) to pay it with a 5 percent interest rate on those two additional years.
According to Stamm, he has explained the process to the homeowners and neither has agreed to pay for their portion of the curb and sewer improvement. He stated he met with one of the homeowners personally to explain the options for them to pay the city. The other home is a rental and Stamm said he has contact the owner by phone but has had little success with working out a solution.
The Barretts Law allows the city to complete the improvements and the cost of the improvements become a lien against each property that abuts the improvement. It is available for streets and utilities and according to Schneider, the city has used it historically for curb and gutter improvements.
The law is designed to allow the improvements deemed necessary for various public concerns — safety, maintenance, or improved performance — to be completed. Invoking the law will slow the process of completing the curb and gutter project and Stamm said today, he wanted to start the process so he could finish the project during the 2015 construction season.
During the process, after the board gives approval for the project, it will hold a hold a public hearing and the homeowners affected will be notified. During the hearing, cost estimates are presented and the board gives the final approval — the city will now be paying for new engineering and cost estimates as they proceed.
After construction is completed, another hearing is held to assess the costs assigned to the property owners and if they refuse to pay, the city can file a lien on their properties.
The lien then becomes part of the property’s taxes.
The board also took the following actions.
–Approved a $200,000 loan from the electric department’s cash reserve to the Wastewater Utility. According to Clerk Treasurer Tom Dippel, the city has approved loans for the utility in the past to cover expenses for the department.
–Approved the fire protection contract for Patoka Township for $26,000 in 2015 for the Huntingburg Volunteer Fire Department’s services. The contract is now subject to approval by the Huntingburg Common Council.
–Code Enforcement Officer Steve Collett reported to the board that he and City Planner Paul Lake had inspected Mary Burch’s 609 Washington St. property and found that she was complying with the city’s requested repairs to the condemned house. Burch successfully appealed a demolition order on the property but is required to allow monthly inspections of the property.
I guess homeowners should be happy that the city didn’t decide to make the curbs out of gold and charge them whatever the council wanted to value the improvements at. This is an example of forcing someone to pay for something that they didn’t get any say in. I mean the city did split the cost of the improvements by using his tax money in an effort to get an equal amount after construction.
Did the homeowners have the opportunity to decline the improvement? Of course not, so who owns the property? The homeowner or the city? If the city owns the property, why aren’t they paying the mortgages or taxes?
Think America! You are losing your most basic rights and a “law” that violates your rights is no law at all. Does the constitution protect your property rights? Of course it does, so how can a law that subverts your right to authorize or refuse work to your property be used to place a lien against it? If a trespasser comes on your property and a makes an improvement, the fact that they committed a crime to do the improvement in the first place voids their claim that you owe them for the improvement.
According to the courts the laws are void, when they violate the constitution.
“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
“All acts of legislature…contrary to natural right and justice are void.” Robin v. Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109(1772)
“without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.” Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828).
In LONG v. SHOREBANK DEVELOPMENT CORP. 182 F. 3d 548, 561 (7th Cir. 1999), [22-24] “A void judgment”, that is one entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction over the parties, the subject-matter or lack inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court.”
Fraud, if they claim to own your property to authorize the improvement and then pass the bill to a third party (you), that is fraud. it would be the same as making you pay for my wedding, because I said.
Good luck America. If you let this continue to them, it will end up at your doorstep. It isn’t about $1,200 or $2,100 either, It could just as easily be a million and your property can be foreclosed over a lien. Imagine losing your home over a $5 tax lien.
Much respect Sir!! Thanks for supporting my mom during this fight!!