My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1989/02/06
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
Agenda Packets - 1989/02/06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 4:15:08 PM
Creation date
4/15/2025 4:15:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/6/1989
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
139
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
City Council/Town Board/ .2- January 20, 1989 <br />Rural Water Supply/System Operatnr <br />cost of all required water analyses, require, annroximately $3 million per <br />year. <br />The funding options for the drinking water program contained in the report are <br />as follows: <br />1. General Fund. Every taxpayer contributes to this fund and most state <br />programs use this as their source of funding, therefore there is consider- <br />able competition for these funds. The Commissioner's Drinking Water Task <br />Force recommended that the program be supported by general fund <br />appropriation. <br />2. Revenue -Generating Options. <br />a. Cost -of -Service Fee for Water Testing and inspection for Each Public <br />Water Supply. Cost per person per year ranges from $33.20 (small <br />systems) to $.002 (very large systems). <br />b. Service Connection Fee for Each Customer Connected to a Community <br />Water Supply. Annual fee of $3.20 per water service connection <br />would generate sufficient revenue to support the program. <br />C. Fee Based on the Quantity of Water Used by Each Customer of a Commu- <br />nity Water Supply. A fee of $.021 per 1,000 gallons of water used <br />would generate sufficient revenue. <br />d. Operating Fee. Annual fee based on a sliding scale: noncommunity <br />systems $100 or $200 and community systems $1,300 (less than <br />100 persons served) to $4,200 (grEater than 100,000 persons served). <br />e. Combination of One or Mo,e of the Above. <br />MDW, in its report, is recommending the annual service connection fee as the <br />preferred funding alternative, because it is reasonably equitabie, easy to <br />administer and assures a stable funding source. A bill imposing this fee will <br />be submitted as part of the Governor's legislative package. <br />It is important to note that both federal and state rules place the responsi- <br />bility of water quality monitoring on the Individual water systems. Thus, <br />if+hn Ie...�Ls....., •.L_- _. __.1 __ __ - .. .. _ _ <br />The Legislature will be discussing water supply funding during the current <br />session. Since every public water supply system in the state is affected, we <br />would encourage you to contact vour state legislators and let your feelings be <br />known on the funding alternatives being considered. If you would like to <br />receive a copy of the complete report, please contact me at 612/623-5330 or <br />Dick Clark at 6121623-5227. <br />GLE:RDC:ter <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.