Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After heated hearing, commission annuls Wimbledon paving roll and directs new 50/50 assessment role
Summary
Following hours of public testimony from dozens of Wimbledon Drive residents objecting to an 85/15 assessment formula, the commission annulled the current paving special assessment role and directed staff to prepare a revised role with a 50/50 city/resident split; the motion passed 4–3 on roll call.
After one of the meeting’s longest public hearings and extensive commissioner debate, the Birmingham City Commission on May 5 annulled the current special assessment district (SAD) role for paving in Wimbledon Drive Phase 1 and directed staff to prepare a new role calculated on a 50/50 city/resident split. The vote on the motion to annul and reissue the role was 4–3 on roll call.
The decision came after hours of testimony from residents who said updated assessment notices had shown much larger costs than earlier estimates, that many homeowners were surprised to learn Wimbledon is designated a major street for state funding purposes, and that the original 85/15 split placed an unfair burden on properties with atypical lot geometries. Throughout the hearing numerous residents repeatedly stated, “I reserve my right to protest,” and presented detailed affordability concerns.
Staff and commissioners debated technical options — including bonding, cap/limit approaches, and whether a temporary cape‑seal would be feasible — and staff warned that deferring paving could require re‑permitting and rebidding and might not reduce final costs. Legal staff advised that the commission could annul the role and direct a new role be prepared; that new role must be noticed and subject to another public hearing.
Roll‑call vote on the motion (annul and prepare a new 50/50 role): Mayor Therese Long — Yes; Commissioner Host — Yes; Mayor Pro Tem Bauer — No; Commissioner Anthony Long — Yes; Commissioner Hague — No; Commissioner Emerine — No; Commissioner Schaefer — Yes. The motion passed 4–3. Commissioners asked staff to prepare the new role and public notice as required by the SAD ordinance; the new role will be re‑noticed for confirmation at a future meeting.
Commissioners emphasized that the decision modifies only the paving assessment role; infrastructure work tied to water and sewer laterals remains a separate SAD process and was addressed later in the meeting.
