Laserfiche WebLink
r NOV 9 1983 <br />55 nu 279 <br />Attorney Brandenburg reviewed staff memo, as follows: <br />TO:The Honorable Members of theDATE: October 25, 1983 FILE: <br />Board of County Commissioners <br />r <br />Through: Terrance G. Pinto <br />Utility Services Director <br />SUBJECT: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES <br />AMENDMENTS TO FRANCHISE <br />FROM: Joyce S. Hamilton I. �+ 1) Water Agreement <br />Administrative AssistantREFERENCES: 2) Location Map <br />Utility Services <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: <br />General Development Utilities, Inc., has proposed certain amend- <br />ments to _their water and sewer franchise. The Utility desires <br />to clarify the procedures for the processing of the "pass-through" <br />to its customers of rate -charges imposed on it by the County under <br />an agreement to purchase wholesale water utility service from <br />the County. The Utility also desires to revise its franchised If <br />territory. <br />Consistent with current policy, the County desires to impose a(6%) <br />franchise fee on the provision of water and sewer services by the <br />Utility. The County also desires to reserve the right to adopt, <br />in addition to the provisions herein contained and existing appli- <br />cable resolutions or laws, such fees and charges as it shall find <br />necessary in the exercise of the police power and lawful authority <br />vested in said County. <br />ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSES: <br />Amending this franchise agreement would allow for the collection <br />of franchise fees to the County which was not part of the original <br />agreement and we have limited their franchise area to what we <br />think is more suitable for them to serve. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends the Board amend the original Resolution dated <br />April 5, 1960 subsequently amended by Resolution No. 77-95, <br />Resolution No. 80-15, and Resolution No. 81-101. <br />The Attorney noted that Section 17B of the proposed <br />Resolution should be deleted from the Board's consideration <br />as they have not approved the purchase agreement tonight. <br />He continued that, if desired, that section could be left <br />in, and if the Board didn't approve the water purchase <br />agreement, it just would never be an applicable section. <br />That way it would not have to be addressed at another public <br />hearing. Mr. Fancher was agreeable to this suggestion. <br />44 <br />