My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-12-1999 ERMU MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
01-12-1999 ERMU MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2018 9:42:34 AM
Creation date
7/24/2018 9:42:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUMIN
date
1/12/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Page 4 <br /> Regular meeting of the Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission <br /> January 12, 1999 <br /> After further discussion of the issues it became apparent that three options are <br /> available to the Commission of the Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission. <br /> a. No decision at this time. <br /> b. Funding of the entire shortfall. <br /> c. Request TIF involvement. <br /> Revenue projections were discussed,particularly in regard to the Springstead <br /> Study contained in the 1999 Budget Appendix. <br /> George Zabee moved to fund the Water shortfall to a minimum of$500,000.00 <br /> to the projected $800,000.00; with the contingency that up to $300,000.00 be <br /> reserved by the City in TIF funds, should the Utility become unable to make <br /> bond payments without raising rates,based upon the above referenced study <br /> John Dietz seconded the motion. Motion carried 3-0. <br /> 5.5 Up-date Well#6 (verbal) <br /> Robert McCartney updated the Commission on the progress of Well#6, <br /> explaining the problems with cold weather, equipment and that drilling has <br /> increased in footage. Construction on a building will probably not begin until <br /> sometime in March. <br /> 6.1 Review and consider Part-time Customer Service Person <br /> A part-time contract customer service person was budgeted for 1999. Benefits <br /> of this service were addressed. The need for special attention to Demand <br /> customers was addressed, as well as the need for making the Utility more <br /> accessible to all our customers, keeping in mind that restructuring will happen <br /> in the future. The contract customer service person would assist the Utility, as <br /> well as help with load management and managing our electrical peaks. <br /> Compensation and hours spent working for ERMU were discussed. James Tralle <br /> stressed that we need to be pro-active, and the hiring of this person would help <br /> accomplish the task. <br /> John Dietz moved to offer part-time Contract Customer Service work for one day <br /> per week, at a cost not to exceed $12,000.00 annually. George Zabee seconded <br /> the motion. Motion carried 3-0. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.