Laserfiche WebLink
STAFF REPORT <br /> PAGE TWO <br /> OCTOBER 1, 1992 <br /> 2 . Unit rate fee - suggested by NSP. Each unit rate <br /> classification would pay a set amount for the duration of <br /> the franchise (no inflation factor involved) i.e. , <br /> Small Gen. Users $ 20. 00/yr. <br /> Gen. Users 40. 00/yr. <br /> Large C/I Users 60. 00/yr. <br /> • - 'en - _ . . <br /> (The numbers used here are for demonstration purposes only. <br /> 3 . A combination of franchise tax and property tax increase. <br /> The general consensus of the group was that they preferred the <br /> City to raise revenue through property tax. <br /> However, subsequent to the departure of many members of the <br /> business community, Charles Hall suggested a franchise tax based <br /> on a sliding scale of 4% on residential (or less) , 4% on small <br /> general service users (small business) , 3% on the next rate <br /> structure of general service (small and secondary users) , 2% on <br /> the next user classification and 1% on all large business users. <br /> This sliding scale would apply to electric use, but a similar one <br /> could be applied to gas use (although there are fewer rate <br /> classifications in gas. ) <br /> NSP was asked to determine the revenues generated by such a <br /> sliding scale and fax the information to staff, Charles Hall and <br /> Barb Holkey by Thursday, afternoon. As of the writing of this <br /> staff report, the fax had not arrived. <br /> Oire—inupoitairt liote is thatmost of the business representatives <br /> had left when this option,was suggested by Mr. Hall. Since this <br /> is an option to the groups consensus of preference for property <br /> tax, Charles Hall agreed to canvass the business community as to <br /> their opinions on his proposal. <br /> Representatives from the business and residential community will <br /> be in attendance at Monday night's meeting. <br />