Laserfiche WebLink
As discussed during the budget process, I would like to see us <br />develop a program whereby sewer rates can be leveled out so that <br />major variations from year to year in MWCC billings will not <br />result in huge fluctuations in our rates. To that end, I believe <br />we do not have to pass on this entire increase at this time. <br />Rather, I would like to see us eliminate the projected loss based <br />on the budgetary information. To do so would require the <br />following rate adjustments: <br />Residential & <br />Commercial w/o Water <br />Commercial w/ Water <br />Multiple Family Units <br />Presently Proposed <br />$34 /SAC Unit $37.50 /SAC Unit <br />$1.85/1,000 Gals <br />w/ $34 minimum <br />70% of $34 /SAC <br />Unit <br />$2.05/1,000 Gals <br />w/ $37.50 minimum <br />70% of $37.50 /SAC <br />Unit <br />Please note that the overall rate structure has not been adjusted <br />since 1991. There was an adjustment in 1992 to bring the <br />multiple family units more in line with what other customers were <br />paying. The increase from $34 to $37.50 is 10.3 %. The increase <br />in the per 1,000 rate from $1.85 to $2.05 is 10.8 %. We estimate <br />that this increase should yield approximately $56,000 in revenues <br />based on 1993 data. Given the healthy nature of the sewer fund <br />and other variables, I feel this increase should be sufficient at <br />this time. <br />The other issue relates to the water service charge imposed on <br />entities not connected to City water, yet having City water <br />adjacent to their property. Attached is a listing of businesses <br />affected by this charge. In one case, I feel our charge is <br />excessive. The case involves the car wash at 2600 Rice Street. <br />As the attached spread sheet depicts, the car wash's water <br />service charge is based on 12 SAC units. I feel we are hard <br />pressed to show that this entity is receiving the benefits <br />associated with that charge in comparison to other system users. <br />In the case of the two trailer parks, SAC units were addressed by <br />agreements with the City Council back in 1982. I feel those <br />agreements and their subsequent charges should remain in effect. <br />In the case of the Venetian Inn, they are connected to the City <br />water system for fire sprinkler coverage. I feel this does <br />provide a major benefit to that business consistent with other <br />commercial entities which are charged based on SAC units. <br />Therefore, that charge should also remain in effect. <br />2 <br />PAGE 18 <br />