Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />"Y,r;f <br />.~(, <br />~\1 <br /> <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL <br />UTILITIES COMMISSION <br /> <br />PAT KLAERS, CITY ADMINISTRATOR <br /> <br />DATE: APRIL 5, 1993 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: FINANCING WATER SYSTEM <br />IMPROVEMENTS <br /> <br />INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />After analyzing the municipal water system needs and the <br />finances involved with this issue, the City staff and the <br />Utilities staff have come to the same conclusion. This <br />conclusion is that immediate water system improvements (known <br />to be present within five years) can be financed. The <br />questions before the City Council and Utilities Commission is a <br />policy issue. This policy issue is: if additional funds are <br />needed to finance the water system improvements, then what <br />mechanism should be used to generate this revenue? Should the <br />mechanism be a Water Impact Fee (WIF) or an increase in the <br />Water Availability Charge (WAC)? The staff's analysis of the <br />finances should provide the Council and the Commission with <br />some information on how much revenue is needed. <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br /> <br />A joint meeting between the City Council and Utilities <br />Commission was held on February 17, 1993. A great deal of <br />progress toward resolving issues related to the municipal water <br />system was made at this meeting. This joint meeting was the <br />result of a number of individually held City Council meetings <br />and Utilities Commission meetings on the topic of the water <br />system needs since the last joint meeting on June 29, 1992. At <br />this most recent joint meeting, it was acknowledged that the <br />City and the Utilities have to work together in order to plan <br />the growth of the community and to meet our responsibilities in <br />providing urban services. At this meeting, staff was directed <br />to review all available revenues and costs of future <br />improvements and to formulate a recommendation on an <br />appropriate fee and method for collection. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />At this stage of discussion in addressing the water system <br />needs, there are only three reasons why the City is involved <br />with this utility issue. If it wasn't for the fact that the <br />City will be issuing G.O. bonds for water system improvements, <br />which is backed by the full faith and credit of the City <br />(taxpayer), and for the fact that the financing mechanism for <br />the bonds may involve a new City development requirement, then <br />this issue would be more appropriately analyzed and addressed <br />by the Utilities Superintendent and the Utilities Commission. <br />If not for these two issues involving the City, the question of <br /> <br />720 Dodge Avenue N.W., Elk River, Minnesota 55330 (612) 441-7420 <br />