My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1995/09/11
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
Agenda Packets - 1995/09/11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:49:58 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 10:00:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
9/11/1995
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
9/11/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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
UNAPPROVED <br /> Page 10 <br /> August 21, 1995 <br /> 1 systems. He would be more concerned about the main influx structure as opposed to the <br /> 2 individual meters, which has been in since 1963. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 Mr. McCarty noted that there is a difference in Option#1 & Option#2 in regard to the <br /> 5 numbers charged to the Water Availability Charge and he was wondering why this is the <br /> 6 case. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Mr. Ulrich stated the reason for the change was to allow it to move financed more in- <br /> hous t . ' . .- •10 <br /> 11 Craig Weinmann, 2209 Bronson Drive stated he is concerned about the $830,000 <br /> 12 expenditure. If the water meters are reading as accurately as they are, we should locate <br /> 13 the bad ones and replace only those. For those who are refusing to allow meter readers <br /> 14 in, a meter should be relocated to the outside of the property. He also suggested that <br /> 15 residents be held responsible for calculating the usage,thereby creating less workload for <br /> 16 staff He feels there are many other options which cost far less. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 Council member Hankner stated the city has attempted to replace meters for the past <br /> 19 fifteen years. This problem only continues to get worst. <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Marshall Mills, 7550 Greenfield, asked what the charge would be to upgrade the system <br /> 22 from a touch read to a phone read in the future. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Mayor Linke responded that it would be an additional $300,000 plus the cost for labor. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Mr. Mills asked if the S.R. meters would be an option for those homes with old meters. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Mr. Ulrich noted that these meters are no longer manufactured. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Dave Janke, 8420 Eastwood Road asked why some type of plan wasn't put together to <br /> 31 replace the meters. He felt the council should consider an option#4. He believes all <br /> 32 meters could be changed over a period of time. However,he felt the council should take <br /> 33 a good look at a plan and how it can be updated without spending three quarters of a <br /> 34 million dollars. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Council member Quick stated $330,000 of WAC funds will be used to finance the <br /> 37 project, so in essence it has been planned for. In the past ten years as a Council member <br /> 38 he has seen two water towers replaced, a new system has been put in to filter out <br /> 39 manganese out of the water,the city has replaced motors,pumps, and has done many <br /> 40 more things. The city has brought it down to the lowest cost with the technology that is <br /> 41 available. <br /> 42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.