CC PACKET 08231988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 The above had been the recommendation of the project engineers, Short- •2 Elliott-Hendrickson, Inc. , whose July 12th letter had summarized the 3 findings of the study they had made which had caused them to conclude: 4 *a rate increase to cover these costs would be easier to justify and 5 less complicated to implement than an assessment to the customers 6 tributary to the pumping station; 7 *using a City-wide rate increase would result in a lower cost per 8 customer; 9 Childs recommended the same method of financing be adopted when the 10 City undertakes improvement of the sanitary sewer system under Wilson 11 Street N.E. 12 Enrooth stated that he still believed the reason the City had to replace 13 the lift station had by and large been because of sand and gravel 14 generated by the Happy's Potato Chip plant whose input far- exceeded any 15 which could possibly emanate from a residential dwelling. The 16 Councilmember indicated he was usually "pro-business' .but was concerned 17 that Happy's be required to pay their fair share. 18 Childs told him the only argument he could offer was the fact that 19 Happy's would also be paying the costs of the improvements on the south 20 side of the City, which would probably be of no particular benefit to 21 them. He stated the concerns of the engineers that an assessment might 62 be based on a low consumption quarter and result in residents perceiving 3 that method might be unfair for their particular situation. He 24 confirmed that if the Council went along with his recommendations, the 25 only City projects which would be assessed in the future would be street 26 and storm sewer. However, the City might decide to establish a Storm 27 Sewer Utility Fund to cover future storm sewer projects and to avoid 28 resident protests about being assessed more than once for the same 29 system. 30 Enrooth acceded to the other Councilmembers' decision to go along with . 31 staff and the engineers on this issue and Marks' perception that it 32 might cost the City more in engineering costs to find out how they 33 could make the assessment more reflective of usage than could be saved 34 by going with the rate adjustment. 35 Childs indicated he perceived he had a Council consensus on the policy, 36 but said he would return to the Council if the rate increase exceeded 37 the 10 cents he anticipated would be necessary to cover the lift 38 station project costs . and would look more at the Happy's issue. Part 39 of the Wilson Street project costs would be incorporated into the MSA 40 study on the street improvements. 41 Council Not in Favor of St. Anthony DroRping Sprinkling Restrictions Now 42 That Well #3 and the New Carbon System are in Full Operation 19