New Search
,, <br />News Released -- Page 2 <br />The ruling addressed the issue of whether River Road residents should be <br />i <br />(able to vote on the sewer project. "It is the court's opinion that whether <br />jthe bonds a considered as special assessment ... revenue or simply revenue <br />;bonds, the plaintiffs have no right to participate in a referendum vote," <br />i <br />!Judge Goode rote. The judge based his opinion on the fact that, although <br />';River Road p operty owners have an obligation to pay for the sewers, it is <br />jthe city's o ligation to repay the bonds. <br />i <br />The cit had asked for a speedy decision on the lawsuit, and Judge Goode <br />granted that request. "Based on the evidence in this case ... this appears <br />to be a cont overly that should be decided without delay," the judge wrote in <br />'his opinion. <br />The cit this year began a six-year project to construct sewers that <br />'will serve <br />owners in <br />The 1 <br />II!constructi <br />'this week. <br />e 8,700 properties in River Road and Santa Clara. Property <br />t area will pay for the sewers through assessments. <br />uit had blocked a short-term sale of notes to pay for on-going <br />costs. The city now plans to reoffer the notes for sale later <br />### <br /> <br />