My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2015 01 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2015 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2015 01 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:00 PM
Creation date
1/21/2015 7:20:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2015 01 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />January 6 2015 <br />Page 6 of 15 <br />Recommended Rate Increases: <br />Service 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 <br />Water $12.32 $12.32 $13.68 $15.18 $15.18 $15.18 <br />Wastewater 20.69 26.28 31.53 32.79 32.79 32.79 <br />Stormwater 4.23 4.23 4.74 4.78 4.78 4.78 <br />Combined $37.24 $42.83 $49.94 $52.76 $52.78 $52.86 <br />Bill <br />% of Increase -0- 15.0% 16.6% 5.6% 0.0% 0.2% <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS <br />Council member Stolzmann voiced her appreciation for all the work done on the Utility <br />Funds Financial Plan and acknowledged the need to increase the rates. She did not <br />agree with the fundamental assumption behind the cost of service adjustments for <br />residential and non - residential use. She did not feel it addressed the underlining costs <br />being driven by those two groups because the billing is set up to encourage more <br />conservation on the residential side. She stated it is not consistent with the American <br />Water Works Association manual. She did not favor water budgets or continuing to <br />work on the concept. She addressed the stormwater proposal, which only takes 50 <br />properties out of the floodplain at a cost of $8.8 Million. She did not see a benefit of the <br />project and favored delaying or discontinuing the project. She agreed the rate <br />increases were necessary so the City is not growth dependent, but supported taking out <br />any projects not necessary, to keep the water rates as low as possible. <br />Public Works Director Kowar stated the City is not required to do financial service <br />adjustments or the stormwater project, but is required to do the wastewater project to <br />meet future EPA permits. <br />Council member Lipton stressed the importance of explaining to the public the reason <br />for the increases. He agreed they are long term investments the public should be <br />required to pay for, but he would be more comfortable with smoothing out the increases <br />over a period of time instead of frontloading them. He addressed the water budget <br />concept and stated his understanding the City Council had directed staff not to work on <br />this project. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Dalton also agreed the City Council directed staff not to proceed with <br />the water budget concept. <br />Council member Leh agreed with the concept of smoothing out the rate increases over <br />a period of time. He inquired what measures will be taken to assist residents who have <br />financial difficulties in paying for the increases in the utility bills. Public Works Director <br />Kowar stated there is currently not a financial assistance program for utilities, but it <br />could be investigated and noted other cities have such programs. Council member Loo <br />stated the Senior Foundation have funds to assist seniors with their utility bills. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.