My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 01131998
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1998
>
CC MINUTES 01131998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 4:49:42 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 4:49:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
19
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1998
SP Name
CC MINUTES 01131998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br /> January 13, 1998 <br /> Page 7 <br /> 1 storm water utility fees charged in the metropolitan area based on a survey of thirty <br /> 2 communities performed by WSB approximately one year ago. This increase would generate <br /> 3 approximately $165,000 annually and would not be adequate to fund all improvements. ' <br /> 4 Outside funding sources are necessary. It is the opinion of the Task Force that the fee may <br /> 5 need to be increased in the future if no outside funding is secured. There is intent to obtain <br /> 6 outside funding. The increase in the fee will demonstrate that the community is doing all <br /> 7 they can to fund the solution but is unable to do so on their own. <br /> 8 Mayor Ranallo questioned if the fee would be the same for smaller lots with inexpensive <br /> 9 homes and larger lots with more expensive homes. <br /> 10 Mr. Willenbring stated the fee would be the same. He acknowledged the inequity but also <br /> 11 noted that the same inequity exists with the current $3 per quarter fee. He stated that <br /> 12 generally utility fees have no differential based on the ability to pay or the market value of <br /> 13 the property. <br /> 14 Faust noted that the amount of run-off from the smaller lot could be higher than that of the <br /> 15 larger lot and provide a case for the smaller lot to pay a higher fee. <br /> 16__---Mr—Willenbring agreed that it could be looked at either way. He noted it is possible to <br /> calculate the impervious surface on each lot and adjust the fee in that manner but that it is <br /> 8 difficult and not always accurate. <br /> 19 Marks asked if Mr. Willenbring was aware of any cities that adjusted the fee based on the <br /> 20 percentage of impervious surface. <br /> 21 Mr. Willenbring stated that most utility fees attempt to address this issue through the land use, <br /> 22 ex., single-family lot versus multiple-family lot. <br /> 23 Cavanaugh noted that this issue was discussed when the original fee was established. It was <br /> 24 determined then that a flat fee was the practical was to address the issue and the best for the <br /> 25 community. <br /> 26 Mr. Willenbring noted that the Task Force is recommending that the increase in the utility fee <br /> 27 be implemented in 1998. <br /> 28 Mr. Willenbring stated that Task II is to establish a Flood Proofing Grant Program. This <br /> 29 program would make $50,000 to $100,000 of City funds available annually over the next 5 <br /> 30 years. Grant applications would be submitted by property owners who experienced damage as <br /> 31 a result of the July 1997 storm event. The grants would be used to provide flood proofing <br /> 32 improvements to the homes. The homeowner would pay 35% of the cost of improvements <br /> and the City would pay 65%. This percentage is based on the current percentage of payment <br /> for street improvement projects (the homeowner pays 35% and the City pays 65%). Also, if <br /> 35 the homeowner contributes to the cost of the improvements it will encourage them to keep the <br /> 36 cost of the improvements low. The Task Force has suggested that the grant application be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.