Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 7, 2010 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 90 that he has reported to the council previously on a budget outline for how the city would <br /> 91 use utility funds and it is a limited scope. He reviewed the proposed line item budget. <br /> 92 <br /> 93 A council member confirmed that additional funding(above this year's budget)will cover <br /> 94 only the work that should be done but that has been underfunded in the past. There was a <br /> 95 request for assurance that a new utility couldn't become a"blank check"and Director <br /> 96 Grochala responded that there have been qualifiers put into the proposed ordinance as <br /> 97 well as language that clarifies that utility revenue cannot be used to fund certain things; <br /> 98 there is also a requirement that a budget be prepared annually. <br /> 99 <br /> 100 The mayor noted that there were some good questions and suggestions raised at the recent <br /> 101 public hearing on this ordinance and asked for a staff response. Mr. Grochala replied that <br /> 102 one question arose as to why there is not an exemption for a gravel road and he explained <br /> 103 that it is not considered a pervious surface; regarding an exemption for a private rain <br /> 104 garden, the consideration is more in the area of a possible credit for public rain gardens. <br /> 105 <br /> 106 Regarding a question posed about the cost of the study, Mr. Grochala explained that the <br /> 107 studies have not been funded through the general fund but rather through a developer <br /> 108 funded account. He added that water quality improvement is the overall goal of the <br /> 109 storm water program and one result of a utility is that the city would see more work in <br /> 110 that area. <br /> 111 <br /> 112 The mayor suggested that he sees the proposed budget as appropriately funding what <br /> `-- 113 should be done in the area of storm water management,however, he is uncertain about <br /> 114 the need for a utility and he's still looking for more of a line item budget. Why not just <br /> 115 fund the program? <br /> 116 <br /> 117 The council discussed the possibility of including funds in the coming budget. One <br /> 118 council member noted that a user fee (the utility) is closer to a fair paying system but it <br /> 119 would be clearer to the citizens if they received a tax credit statement that shows what's <br /> 120 coming off their property taxes as a result of the utility. There was also a suggestion of <br /> 121 establishing an advisory group that would monitor a utility. Staff indicated that the <br /> 122 monitoring group would be the Environmental Board. <br /> 123 <br /> 124 Ron Leaf,the SEH consulting engineer who worked on the update to the study mentioned <br /> 125 that, looking ahead, it appears that the government is going in the direction of requiring a <br /> 126 dedicated funding source for storm water management although that is not yet the case. <br /> 127 When asked if he could explain the minimum amount of work required of the city, he <br /> 128 responded that it isn't easy to identify minimums but rather the city should be working <br /> 129 out an appropriate program based upon its goals. <br /> 130 <br /> 131 Staff was directed to prepare a more detailed budget. <br /> 132 <br /> 3 <br />