During the public hearing, residents voiced strong concerns about the financial impact of the proposed street and sewer assessments linked to the 2025 Street Reconstruction Project. Brian Rinsky, a resident of Greystone, was one of the outspoken critics. He questioned the necessity of reconstruction on streets he believed to be in good condition. Rinsky expressed skepticism regarding the allocation of tax money. His remarks underscored a broader apprehension among residents about the financial implications of the project.

Another resident, Dannyelle Le, articulated her frustrations with the assessments, pointing out the burden they placed on community members, particularly single parents and those living on fixed incomes. Le criticized the sudden financial demands as “ridiculous and cruel,” calling for the council to consider measures that could alleviate the impact on residents who were not adequately informed about the assessments. Her comments were echoed by others at the meeting, painting a picture of a community grappling with the financial realities of necessary infrastructure improvements.

Michael Dobbins, also a resident, raised questions about potential assistance for individuals struggling to pay these assessments. He referred to a hardship deferral program mentioned by city staff. The finance director responded by outlining the criteria for this program, which includes considerations such as age, disability, and income. Residents were advised to contact City Hall to obtain the necessary forms for applying for deferral.

The financial aspects of the project were further scrutinized during the hearing. The city presented details on the assessment process, explaining that special assessments function as a form of a loan, with interest accruing over ten years based on the city’s bond rates. While the total project cost was highlighted, it was noted that special assessments would cover approximately 18% of the expenses. The council clarified that these assessments are separate from property taxes, emphasizing that, ultimately, residents contribute to the cost of improvements through various forms of payment.

The hearing touched upon the communication issues between the city and its residents. Rinsky criticized the city’s communication strategy, describing it as “extremely terrible.” He noted discrepancies in the calculation of frontage measurements used to determine assessment costs, questioning the fairness and transparency of the process.

Following the public hearing, the council moved to close the session and proceeded to discuss the assessments. A motion to waive the reading and adopt a resolution related to the assessments passed without opposition. The council then transitioned to an open forum, inviting further public comments, but no additional residents stepped forward.

Beyond the discussions on assessments, the meeting included updates on various community projects and services. The council provided an update from the tree board, highlighting its 2025 work plan and preparations for the Arbor Day Giveaway. Additional updates focused on upcoming community events, including the disposal of Christmas trees, the Oakdale indoor market, picnic shelter reservations, and the new drop-off service for unused and expired household medications at City Hall.

The meeting also reviewed the claims roster, totaling approximately $1.68 million for the period from January 15 to January 28. Specific claims were not discussed, and the motion to approve the claims passed unanimously. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn.