My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07/07/2008 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2008
>
07/07/2008 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2014 10:48:23 AM
Creation date
5/9/2014 11:16:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
07/07/2008
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
284
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
Memorandum <br />June 19, 2008 <br />In contrast, the gross revenue fees can turn an initially supportive customer into a vocal <br />opponent when a spike in the fee occurs later in the collection period. <br />4. It is not subject to a decrease in revenue. Neither the source of the gas or electricity <br />nor the utilities revenues in the city affect the amount of the meter fee revenue collection. <br />5. Large businesses will likely be less opposed to a meter -based franchise fee than to a <br />gross revenue fee, depending on the formula of course. <br />Cons: <br />1. Because this is a fixed fee, it does not change based on customer usage. Persons <br />who go south during the winter or who have strong conservation priorities do not pay lower <br />franchise fees under this design. Thus, adding to the franchise fee unpopularity generally <br />may be an objection from environmentally - conscious residents. The counter to this <br />conservation- related objection is similar to the counter regarding gross revenues above. The <br />amount of money to be saved on a month -to -month basis through conservation is minimal. <br />2. The utility will propose the formula among the customer classes because it provides <br />the city with the sample runs of revenue generated from various formulas. The meter fee <br />will inevitably favor the large businesses. The city is free to counter with its own proposal, <br />but meter fee formulas will never capture more than a few hundred dollars a month from a <br />large business, whereas a percent of gross revenue applied in a high usage month could be <br />in the thousands in fees. <br />Usage -Based Fee <br />This is the least common fee of the three, but has some interesting characteristics. Utilities <br />do not favor it because of the administrative hassle they claim it creates. <br />Pros: <br />1. Unlike the gross revenue fee that will increase with a commodity price, beyond the <br />control of the consumer or utility, the city and utility can agree on a BTU or KWh formula <br />for the fee. So the commodity price will not vary for the franchise fee even though it varies <br />for the remainder of the customer's bill. This makes it a pure usage -based fee that does <br />reward conservation. <br />335300v1 JMS LN140 -105 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.