My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4. SR 11-14-1994
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1994
>
11/14/1994
>
4. SR 11-14-1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:37:00 AM
Creation date
6/26/2007 12:47:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
11/14/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
<br />Memo to Mayor, City Council & Utilities Commission <br />November 4,1994 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />contribution for a specific item; (2.) asking for an increase in the $72,000 <br />contribution and tying this into a percentage for future years; and (3.) not <br />asking for any change in our existing financial relationship. A number of <br />Councilmembers stated that the Commission preferred a contribution to the <br />City for specific items rather than a general increase. <br /> <br />At the 10/24/94 City Council meeting, a motion was approved which balanced <br />the budget with the assumption that the Utilities Commission would split <br />the cost of the $110,000 street department front-end loader. This is in <br />addition to the $72,000 contribution. This results in a Council request to the <br />Commission for an additional $55,000 to help finance the front-end loader in <br />1995. <br /> <br />CITY/UTILITIES RELATIONSHIP <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The Utilities is part of and a division of the City. This relationship has most <br />recently been noted in the electric utility lawsuit settlement and its effect on <br />our City and Utilities insurance rates. Likewise, this relationship has been <br />identified in (1.) the Utilities required compliance to the comparable worth <br />law; (2.) the Utilities required compliance to the open meeting law; (3.) the <br />Utilities required compliance to the City ethics ordinance; (4.) the fact that <br />the Utilities are governed by the City Council approved utility ordinance; (5.) <br />the fact that the Commission is appointed by the City Council; (6.) the <br />requirement that the Utilities are part of the City audit; and (7.) the fact that <br />the City is responsible for the Utilities compliance to State laws as they <br />relate to public employees (i.e., employee contracts). There are many other <br />activities and issues that identify the Utilities as part of the City. <br /> <br />The City and the Utilities have a special relationship. We are partners in our <br />urban growth. Without the water utility being extended with the sewer <br />utility, then there is no urban growth. This growth is necessary to improve <br />our employment and tax base. While this growth provides additional <br />revenues and profits for the electric utilities, it also requires additional <br />expenses for the City in providing services. As we are partners in growth, the <br />City should be able to benefit financially from some of this growth. <br /> <br />CONTRIBUTIONS <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Attached for your information IS some material from the Minnesota <br />Municipal Utilities Association that shows the contributions from electric <br />utilities to their host communities. I have highlighted the larger cities and <br />the cities that make large contributions to their host communities and have <br />added the population of these communities on the side. I do not know what <br />the relationship is between these host communities and the utilities, nor do I <br /> <br />s:council:utilcomm <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.