3/12/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

home. Ms. Sullivan felt there are many inequities in this particular ordinance and that rate schedule needs a serious looking at by the Commission. She commented on one thing that struck her that was mentioned this afternoon and that is when you build capacity and you hold that capacity for future use)you will later charge a higher impact fee for people who will hook up later. If the capacity is built today at today's costs, she did not see how it can be justified that a higher impact fee will be charged at a later date. Director Pinto addressed first the twenty percent conservation increase by stating the Board has already directed an increase would only be done at a public hearing when a water shortage has been declared by the Water Management District so that the automatic increase is taken out of the ordinance. Discussion continued about assessment and the type of assessments used and it was explained that those things are taken up not in this ordinance but at specific assessment hearings at the time of planning any improvements or lines that are built in the streets. They have nothing to do with impact fees that pay for capacity. Assessment is used to fairly distribute the cost of the lines in the street for the benefit of the users, and that does not take place unless an assessment hearing is held. Commissioner Scurlock also stated that the square footage numbers were only given as an example. He confirmed that assessments are only done after public hearings and the particular method of assessment is decided on and agreed to by the people receiving the assessment. Mr. Hutchinson wished to address the point raised by Ms. Sullivan in regard to the high minimum charges. Basically these charges are at the level needed in order to meet the utility system's mostly fixed costs of operation. Of course, the County always can institute some sort of lifeline rate system whereby low- income residents would be subsidized by other customers. The point is, however, that if we provide a subsidy to one group of customers, somebody else has to pay; so in the absence of some sort of formal policy by the Commission to provide lifeline rates, we suggest the rates be based as close as possible on the cost -to - service basis and one that reflects the conservative objective that the Commission has endorsed. Mr. Hutchinson said the final point Ms. Sullivan raised was about the need for increasing impact fees where capacity was to be held for future customers. This is no different from any situation where you have to make an investment in any development and you have to make the investment today. It costs you interest lost on 45 RCICIK °® I h�UC91 R.� MAR 12 091