My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/8/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
9/8/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:40 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:28:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
9 E P 81982 890x 51 pn, 920 <br />Mr. Robbins explained that at that time the rate for <br />the South County was 8 and 2. The rate that was established <br />for the Gifford system (and at that time FmHA required that <br />you treat the systems individually) was $7.10 and $1.50, and <br />the rate that was adopted under the uniform rate structure <br />ordinance was the $7.10 and $1.50. The application that was <br />submitted to FmHA in February of this year, prior to the <br />adoption of the Master Bond Resolution, reevaluated the <br />number of connections (5,152) at 6,040 gallons per month, <br />and showed the existing $7.10 and $1.50 rate as being <br />capable of meeting the covenants of the then bond <br />resolution. What has taken place since the adoption of the <br />Master Bond Resolution is that we now are getting an <br />indication that the mandate for reduction of water use that <br />the Water Management District placed on all utilities last <br />year had a much greater effect than anticipated, i.e., a 30% <br />reduction rather than 150. So, basically what has happened <br />- the connection totals appear to be fairly good, but the <br />water use is down and the additional coverage requirements <br />f <br />of the Master Bond Resolution have put us in somewhat of a <br />precarious position. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that the bottom line is that <br />from the beginning the recommendation both from the <br />engineers and from FmHA was not a rate of $7.10 and $1.50. <br />Mr. Robbins confirmed that was correct - it was 8 from <br />the original inception of their preliminary engineering <br />report. <br />Commissioner Wodtke emphasized that those original <br />figures were based.on 9,000 gallons as an average use, and <br />the lower usage of water has had a tremendous effect which <br />will require more dollars. <br />11r. -Robbins explained in detail how the consumption <br />figures were arrived at in 1979 and how the decrease in <br />water consumption has caused the rates to be insufficient. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.