12-6a08.
Financing costs; assessment plan; classifications, formulae and methods of assessment.
(a) The portion of the cost of any improvement to be assessed against the property in the improvement district as determined in K.S.A. 12-6a04, and amendments thereto, shall be apportioned against the property in accordance with the special benefits accruing thereto by reasons of such improvement or in accordance with the provisions of any petition submitted pursuant to subsection (b) or (c) of K.S.A. 12-6a04, and amendments thereto. The cost may be assessed equally per front foot or per square foot against all lots and pieces of land within such improvement district or assessed against such property according to the value of the lots and pieces of land therein as determined by the governing body of the city with or without regard to the buildings and improvements thereon or as set forth in the petition requesting such improvement or the cost may be determined and fixed on the basis of any other reasonable assessment plan which will result in imposing substantially equal burdens or shares of the cost upon property within the improvement district similarly benefited. The governing body may from time to time determine and establish by ordinance reasonable general classifications and formulae for the apportionment of the cost between the city and the area to be assessed, and the methods of assessing the special benefits, for various classes of improvements.
(b) This section shall not be construed to limit the adoption of any assessment plan for any improvement that recognizes varying benefit levels to property within the improvement district and imposes assessments in relation thereto.
History:
L. 1957, ch. 99, § 8; L. 1959, ch. 72, § 3; L. 1983, ch. 63, § 1; L. 2003, ch. 120, § 3; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Davis v. City of Leawood, 893 P.2d 233 (Kan. 1995).
· cites it 2× “” Leawood states that the value conferred on property by an improvement is to be used in computing the amount of an assessment under K.S.A. 12-6a08. Leawood seems to suggest it therefore follows that the district *537 court’s deciding, before considering the amount of the…”
Bauer v. City of Olathe, 894 P.2d 823 (Kan. 1995).
· cites it 3× “12-6a04, and amendments thereto, shall be apportioned against the property in accordance with the special benefits accruing thereto by reasons of such improvement.”
Becker v. City of Wichita, 644 P.2d 436 (Kan. 1982).
· cites it 2× “To determine the special assessment of each landowner in the district, three appraisers were appointed to determine the fair market value of the land in the improvement district without regard to improvements thereon as authorized by K.S.A. 12-6a08 which provides in pertinent…”
Mallon v. City of Emporia, 726 P.2d 1354 (Kan. Ct. App. 1986).
“The method of assessment set forth in the resolution was based upon the appraised valuation of each lot in the subdivision, as permitted by K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 12-6a08. Upon completion of the paving work, the proposed assessment roll was prepared and notice published of a hearing…”
Madden v. Governing Body of Lenexa, 721 P.2d 261 (Kan. 1986).
“On July 2,1985, the district court denied their motion, finding genuine issues of fact existed as to whether the method of assessment selected placed an unfair and unequal burden upon property similarly benefited in contravention of K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 12-6a08. The district court…”
K.S.A. § 12-6a08(a): 2 cases
Davis v. City of Leawood, 893 P.2d 233 (Kan. 1995).
“” Leawood states that the value conferred on property by an improvement is to be used in computing the amount of an assessment under K.S.A. 12-6a08. Leawood seems to suggest it therefore follows that the district *537 court’s deciding, before considering the amount of the…”
Bauer v. City of Olathe, 894 P.2d 823 (Kan. 1995).
“12-6a04, and amendments thereto, shall be apportioned against the property in accordance with the special benefits accruing thereto by reasons of such improvement.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.