01/24/1983 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Gleason said the City is the only agency with the funds to secure the grant during this funding cycle. Mr. Smith said matching funds are $2-1/3 million. He said, included in the program is sanitary sewer rehabilitation. The oldest sewer components in the City are 75 years old, and sewer components are expected to last 100 years. Therefore, major replacements are not needed at this time. He described current methods of funding sewers and the proposed funding method. He said a one-half-cent sewer trunk levy was established in 1948 and has not been increased. However, construction costs have increased by a factor of nine. To keep property owners participating in total cost of sewers equal to 1948, the trunk levy must be raised 2.5 cents per square foot. Staff is also recommending the trunk levy be increased annually to keep pace with the cost of building sewers. Along with a 2.5-cent trunk levy, a 90-cent sewer capital projects and user fee is needed. Mr. Smith said Table 5 explains that the existing sewer customer base primarily fronts the money for the projects in the beginning, and over a long period of time, those monies are recovered. Responding to a question, Mr. Smith said the special trunk levy does not pro- duce a burden on new development. Mr. Gleason emphasized the breakdown of the proposed total sewer user fee charge. The percentages are: regional charge--60%; sanitary operation and maintenance--16%; storm sewer operation and maintenance--14%; Santa Clara and River Road--less than 2%. Responding to a question, Mr. Smith said an increased charge to 2.5 cents per square foot, or 10% in total assessment for sewers is a small increase compared to 24 cents total. lt is a five-fold increase in the trunk levy, but only a 10% increase in the total assessment for sewers. Responding to a question, Mr. Guenzler said Springfield has a $1.40 per month per residential customer charge devoted to capital projects, as compared to the 90-cent proposal for Eugene. Ms. Wooten asked if the City Council of Springfield was commited to working with SUB to arrive at a date in the future to transfer to a residential flow-based system of rates. Mr. Pye responded if the SUB and staff can work out apparent problems as they are presented, a flow-based system can be synchronized. Ms. Smith said Chris Larson, on the Springfield City Council and MWMC is highly interested in promoting a flow-based rate change. Mr. Wright summarized con- cerns expressed by Springfield concerning a flow-based rate charge. Responding to a question, Ms. Hocken said the proposal is to measure how much water people use from November to March each year, and to set the rate for that year on that usage, so water use is not monitored in the summer. Mr. Guenzler said one disadvantage of a residential flow-based system is that it would require billing staff. MlNUTES--Eugene City Council Work Session January 24, 1983 Page 4