Loading...
University Reconstruction_Rampson ResponseTI-IE CITY OF DUB E Masterpiece o~z the Mississippi MEMORANDUM May 29, 2007 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Response to Dean Rampson Letter Dated April 23, 2007 University Avenue Reconstruction Project City Engineer Gus Psihoyos is transmitting further information in response to the letter from Dean Rampson to the Mayor and City Council dated April 23, 2007. During the week of July 11, 2006, Mr. Dean Rampson, the owner of record on that date of 1158-1160 University Avenue, met with Assistant City Engineer Bob Schiesl concerning the City's financial assistance program for special assessments associated with the University Avenue Reconstruction Project. The property at 1158-1160 University Avenue is a duplex; Mr. Rampson lived in one-half of the unit and the other one-half was a rental property. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that the submittal deadline date for application was August 14, 2006. During this meeting, Mr. Rampson stated that he did not have his 2005 income tax completed and that he was granted an extension by the IRS. Bob stated to Mr. Rampson that under special circumstances the City may allow the use of his 2004 income tax records. Mr. Rampson stated that he did not want to pursue that option because his income in 2004 did not reflect his current financial status. Mr. Rampson did not meet the August 14, 2006 application deadline and submitted his financial assistance application on September 19, 2006, 35 days after the deadline. Also, the information Mr. Rampson provided was not complete. Mr. Rampson failed to submit his entire tax return, as is required. During this same time period, staff was verifying property owner records and preparing the final schedule of assessments. Through this process, staff discovered that according to records of the Office of Dubuque County Recorder, Mr. Rampson was not the current owner of record of the property at the time of application submittal. The recorded date for transfer of this property was August 22, 2006. The financial assistance policy clearly states that only owner-occupied properties owners are eligible for financial assistance. Mr. Rampson had placed funds in an escrow account per the terms of the sale of his University Avenue property. I believe that Mr. Rampson was treated fairly and the decisions to deny his requests for financial assistance were both consistent and in compliance with the City's Financial Assistance Policy. ~• ~. ti . Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM/jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer THE CITY OF DuB E MEMORANDUM May 24, 2007 TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer _ ~ SUBJECT: Response to Dean Rampson Letter Dated April 23, 2007 University Avenue Reconstruction Project The purpose of this correspondence is to provide further information in response to the letter from Dean Rampson to the Mayor and City Council members dated April 23, 2007. During the week of July 11, 2006, Mr. Dean Rampson, the owner of record on that date of 1158-1160 University Avenue, met with Assistant City Engineer Bob Schiesl concerning the City's financial assistance program for special assessments associated with the University Avenue Reconstruction Project. The property at 1158-1160 University Avenue is a duplex; Mr. Rampson lived in one-half of the unit and the other one-half was a rental property. Assistant City Engineer Bob Schiesl reviewed the assistance program and application process with Mr. Rampson. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that an informational application packet was mailed to him approximately 2-weeks prior. Mr. Rampson stated that he did not recall receiving the application materials or had misplaced and could not locate the informational packet. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that the submittal deadline date for application was August 14, 2006 and that an additional informational application packet would be mailed to him that same day. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that the application deadline was set to provide adequate staff time to review the submitted information (the actual application, federal income tax, financial information accuracy, etc.) in time for the October 2, 2006 City Council approval of the final schedule of assessments for the University Avenue project. During this meeting, Mr. Rampson stated that he did not have his 2005 income tax completed and that he was granted an extension by the IRS. Bob stated to Mr. Rampson that under special circumstances the City may allow the use of his 2004 income tax records. Mr. Rampson stated that he did not want to pursue that option because his income in 2004 did not reflect his current financial status. Mr. Rampson left the meeting by stating that he would look for the informational application packet in the mail and that he would "see what he could do" to get his 2005 taxes completed in order to get his financial assistance application submitted by the application deadline. Bob acknowledges that Mr. Rampson did explain how busy his life was at the time but at no time did Mr. Rampson state that it would be impossible for him to comply with the application deadline. Mr. Rampson did not meet the August 14, 2006 application deadline and submitted his financial assistance application on September 19, 2006, 35 days after the deadline. Also, the information Mr. Rampson provided was not complete. Mr. Rampson failed to submit his entire tax return, as is required. Mr. Rampson was informed by City staff at the time of submittal (September 19, 2006) that he missed the deadline and that staff would need to discuss the matter with the Assistant City Engineer. During the week following, staff had multiple conversations with Mr. Rampson regarding the status of his request for financial assistance. During this same time period, staff was verifying property owner records and preparing the final schedule of assessments. Through this process, staff discovered that according to records of the Office of Dubuque County Recorder, Mr. Rampson was not the current owner of record of the property at the time of application submittal. The recorded date for transfer of this property was August 22, 2006. The financial assistance policy clearly states that only owner-occupied properties owners are eligible for financial assistance. During the week of September 24, 2006, Bob had a meeting with Mr. Rampson and advised him of our findings and that he would not be eligible for financial assistance. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that although there have been rare exceptions when the City has extended the deadline for medical or hardship reasons (possibly an additional 7-10 days), the Engineering Department felt that sufficient time was given to Mr. Rampson to meet the August 14 deadline which would have been prior to the sale of his property. Mr. Rampson strongly disagreed with the Assistant City Engineer's position in not approving his application for financial assistance. Bob informed Mr. Rampson that the City Engineer supported the decision and would be making the same recommendation to the City Manager. Prior to making my decision, I consulted with City Attorney, Barry Lindahl, and he also concurred in the recommendation to deny the requests for financial assistance based on the fact that he was not the owner of record at the time he submitted the application and that the application was not submitted by the August 14 deadline. Bob explained to Mr. Rampson that the City Council would have the final decision on this matter and that he had the option to address the Council at the October 2, 2006 meeting. Mr. Rampson stated that he was being treated unfairly and he would pursue whatever steps necessary. Based on Mr. Rampson strong objections, staff felt it necessary to prepare an informational memo dated October 2, 2006 (attached) outlining the facts and findings to support not approving his application for financial assistance. Following the approval of the Final Schedule of Assessments for the University Avenue Reconstruction Project, final special assessment notices were mailed to property owners on October 6"', 2006. Although Mr. Rampson was no longer the current owner of record at 1158-1160 University Avenue, staff was directed to also send him a copy of the final assessment notice. This was done as a good faith effort to inform Mr. Rampson of the final assessment amount because he had placed funds in an escrow account per the terms of the sale of his University Avenue property. Mr. Rampson contends that he never received a copy of the final assessment notice. Through the review of the project records, staff has been unable to verify if the copy was ever mailed to Mr. Rampson at his current address and the staff person responsible for mailing the notices is no longer employed with the City. I feel that it is noteworthy to inform you that a similar situation occurred with Mr. Rampson during the Madison Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Project which was completed in 2004. The Madison Street sanitary sewer project was an assessable project and provided sanitary sewer service to four (4) residential properties along Madison Street, which were previously unsewered. Mr. Rampson owns a rental property on Madison Street that was provided sanitary sewer service as part of the project. Mr. Rampson submitted a financial assistance application requesting City assistance in reducing his portion of the sanitary sewer assessment. Because the property was a rental property, only owner-occupied properties are eligible for financial assistance and the application was not approved. In closing, City staff feels that Mr. Rampson was treated fairly and the decisions to deny his requests for financial assistance were both consistent and in compliance with the City's Financial Assistance Policy. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, please advise. Prepared by Robert Schiesl, Assistant City Engineer cc: Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Barry Lindahl, City Attorney Jane Smith, Engineering City Council Apri123, 2007 City of Dubuque ~ o Hon Roy Buol Mayor ~~ ~~ '~ ~ Ric Jones ~ ~ ~ Ann Michalski ~ f: Kevin Lynch ~ ~ G ~° ~ Karla Braig y ~ ru Joyce Conners m w Patricia Cline ° RE: Application by Dean Rampson for assistance on special assessment for the University Avenue Reconstruction Project denied by City of Dubuque Engineering Department. On July 11, 2006 I spoke with Bob Schiesl of the engineering department about applying for assistance for the impending special assessment for the University project. I explained to him that proving my families income by the due date was going to be very difficult since I had filed an extension with IRS until October. Further I was working long hours every day on 1158-60 University, which we had put up for sale, to bring it up to tip top condition. This task was made even more difficult when our next door tenants at 1160 were metharnphetamine abusers and trashed their apartment leaving us over $4000 in damages in 2005, were evicted and left the unit unrentable for eight months. On top of this there was plenty of deferred maintenance to catch up to in a short period. (The property was sold, closing on August 14`h, 2006). In addition to the fix-up we were also in that chaotic and frantic period between closing and buying another house, finding temporary quarters, sorting, packing, donating, boxing, storing, moving not only our belongings, but also those of my mother, my brother, and my son, to say nothing of our considerable possessions in a nine room house with an attic and three garages all before 8/14, also the submission date for the assistance. I scarcely had time to think about taxes. Even when I did I had no idea what box my files were in or where in fact they might be found. In the swirl of activity I misplaced the application and overlooked the filing date, given the situation, a very human result, mea culpa. Finally, on September 3, we moved into temporary quarters with only day to day necessities. Everything else was in storage including the tax files. When things eventually settled down I searched, found the files, filed my taxes and submitted the assistance application to Mr Schiesl on 9/19. Our application reflected an income crippled by the loss at 1160, time and labor spent by me solely on the property and outlays for materials and subcontractors; anincome so low as to qualify us for l00% forgiveness. It was denied. Too late, even though the engineering department had submitted only a preliminary assessment. m tl 0 I visited Mr Schiesl again asking for an appeal of the decision based on our extenuating circumstances. He referred me to Jane Smith of the department who gave me hope by agreeing to review my application, stating that there was precedent for accepting applications after the preliminary special assessment was sent out but before the final assessment was presented to the City Council. I never heard from the department again. Foolishly I kept waiting to hear from someone in the department about the status of the appeal. Not hearing either in writing or by telephone convinced me that the escrow funds were still at the attorneys. Upon calling the attorney this month, he told.me they had been paid out. I now ask the question is the purpose of this assistance to help tax paying voting citizens, or is it set up to punish us if we fail within a reasonable period no matter the circumstances to meet a bureaucratic deadline carved in stone? I don't think this is the purpose of government, at least it wasn't forme during my ten years as a public servant. What is more important, the fact that my family qualified and sorely needed this program, or the fact we missed an arbitrary deadline? We were never notified by letter or phone of our status. We never received a final assessment notification. We were not informed of the date the final assessment was to be presented to the council, which denied us our due process and an opportunity to present our case to the council. A recent phone call to the department was not returned. We gain no user benefit with respect to our assessment since we no longer live on University Avenue and scarcely if ever drive on it anymore by virtue of our new address on the Southside. There is no written policy governing the decision making process dealing with application extensions at the department. Absent that criteria the process becomes completely subjective putting the applicants at a disadvantage, and subjecting them to the whims of the day or worse; prior issues or disagreements with the department. A delay of 30 days in the presentation of an application when the applicants meet all the substantive requirements on income and eligibility, which at the end of the day is the ultimate purpose of the provision, and considering reasonable extenuating circumstances, one would think an extension justifiable and totally proper. We ask that you, the elected voice of the people in your wisdom pursue the just option and allow us to take advantage of the special assessment provision based on our income eligibility and extenuating circumstances and return our escrow in the amount of $2147. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Dean and Jeanette Rampson 670 Cleveland Avenue, 52003 5824524 ~~i~~"~ - ~!l/""