• strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_node_status::operator_form() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::operator_form(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/modules/node/views_handler_filter_node_status.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.

Residents concerned about affordability of project assessments

The Glencoe City Council held a pair of public hearings Monday night at the Glencoe City Center on the proposed 2015 street improvement projects, which could cost a combined $11 million.
The hearings attracted about 30 people, several of whom spoke to the City Council about their concerns. While most were in agreement that the reconstruction of underground utilities and streets in the two project areas were necessary, many were concerned about the high cost of special assessments to residents benefiting from the work along Armstrong Avenue and the 25 blocks around Lincoln Park in the southwest quadrant of Glencoe.
Those residents and businesses will be required to pay 22.1 percent of the $4.5 million Armstrong project and an identical percentage on the $6.5 million Lincoln Park work.
The other 77.9 percent will be paid with general tax dollars, city water and wastewater revenues and municipal state aid funds in the case of Armstrong Avenue work.
Annual debt for the Armstrong Avenue work is estimated at $331,000 a year for the life of the 20-year general obligation bond, and $478,000 a year for the Lincoln Park work.
Offsetting some of the general taxes needed will be the expiration of several older city bonds. With those bonds being paid off, the city plans to replace them with the 2015 street improvement bonds in order to keep the city’s property tax rate level.
Regardless, property owners in both project areas will be on the hook for the special assessments that could run to thousands of dollars each.
Jeff Templin, who lives on Elliott Avenue, summed up the sentiment of many attending the hearing. He said early appraisals indicated some properties could be hit with an additional $14,000 in assessments over the life of the bond. “That will be hard to pay,” he added.

For more from the public hearings, see the Oct. 8 print edition of The Chronicle.