My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8.5. SR 09-02-2014
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2014
>
09-02-2014
>
8.5. SR 09-02-2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2014 11:23:34 AM
Creation date
8/29/2014 10:16:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
9/2/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City of <br /> Elk Request for Action <br /> River <br /> To Item Number <br /> Mayor and City Council 8.5 <br /> Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by <br /> General Business September 2, 2014 Justin Femrite, P.E., City Engineer <br /> Item Description Reviewed by <br /> Stormwater Program Funding Tim Simon, Finance Director <br /> Reviewed by <br /> Cal Portner, City Administrator <br /> Action Requested <br /> Approve,by motion, funding options and direct staff to proceed with communication effort to engage <br /> the resident preference. <br /> Background/Discussion <br /> When reviewing the proposed stormwater budget on August 18, 2014, the City Council directed staff to <br /> bring back options available to fund the program. Projections indicate an annual investment of$500,000 <br /> is required to meet stormwater needs and comply with all regulations of our existing permit. <br /> Three funding options have been evaluated by staff and are as follows: <br /> 1. Eliminate/reduce services provided for within the current tax levy to cover funding shortfall. <br /> 2. Increase levy by$450,000 to make up the shortfall. <br /> 3. Decrease levy by$50,000 and establish a Stormwater Utility Fee to collect the necessary$500,000. <br /> Option 1 would require significant operating changes to existing services and is not considered a viable <br /> option. <br /> Options 2 and 3 provide reliable,long-term funding solutions to a program that is a mandated core <br /> service. It is understood that neither option will be popular;however city financial policies prohibit one- <br /> time revenue use for ongoing, operational costs. <br /> Staff proposes a community engagement effort to inform, educate and receive feedback on the options to <br /> fund the stormwater activity. <br /> There are pros and cons to each revenue source. Property taxes shift the burden to the "wealthy," <br /> properties/property owners,while a utility fee is more akin to a user fee based upon each property's <br /> contribution to the stormwater collection system. <br /> If the Council would consider an increased tax levy to fund the stormwater program,the Preliminary <br /> Levy,which will be approved on September 15,will need to be adjusted accordingly. The Council may <br /> decrease the levy if another option is approved following the community engagement effort. <br /> Financial Impact <br /> All costs associated with the action will come from the approved 2014 Stormwater Budget. <br /> Attachments <br /> • July 2, 2012, Stormwater Utility Fee Presentation <br /> P a w E A E U s r <br /> NaA f RE] <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.