Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Special District topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public hearing set for proposed Cayley Ridge/Municipal Property Owners district; petition would assess up to $50/month per lot
Summary
An attorney for Havens Development LLC asked the board to set a hearing to consider forming Municipal Property Owners Multipurpose Improvement District No. 2675 (Cayley/Cali Ridge Estate) on a ~25-acre parcel (parcel 8474); counsel said assessments would be 'no more than $50 per month per lot' to fund infrastructure bonds. The board set the hearing for Sept. 1.
Get email alerts on the Development Special District topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Perry Young, attorney on behalf of Havens Development LLC, told the board that his client submitted a petition on July 28 asking the city to establish Municipal Property Owners Multipurpose Improvement District No. 2675, also described in the packet as Cali/Cayley Ridge Estate, covering parcel number 8474 along Birchwood Bay Road.
Young said the district model allows lot owners to be assessed monthly to fund bonds for water, sewer, grading, paving, curbing and sidewalks and that, based on information provided to him, assessments would be "no more than $50 per month per lot" over the life of the bond. He added that Havens Development LLC would be the record title holder of the property and that three initial commissioners—Todd Havens, Paula Alderman and Danielle Barlow—were listed in the petition. The board was reminded that state law (Ark. Code Ann. §14‑94‑101 et seq.) requires the board to hold a hearing to verify ownership and give mortgage holders notice; counsel said if first‑lien mortgage holders representing more than 10% of the area object, the petition must be rejected.
City counsel told the board this meeting's role was to set the hearing time and date; the board agreed to set the hearing for Sept. 1 so detailed materials (map, legal code citations and address data) can be included in the packet ahead of the hearing. No final decision on formation was made at this agenda meeting.

