Resolution No. 4793 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FINANCIAL STRATEGY 8.4 Evaluation of Local Funding Resources MWMC will rely on monthly wastewater rates and SDCs for revenue. Financing for capital projects w/il most likely be provided by revenue bonds, although MWMC would like to retain the option to use t. he State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) program administered by DEQ. As stated in section 8.2, MWMC is in a strong position with respect to its credit-worth/ness. MWMC's sound financial management, long-term financial forecasting and planning, stable operations, and a host of other qualitative indicators all show that MWMC would per£orm extremely well in any assessment by a credit rating agency or other financhl body. 8.5 Evaluation of Federal and State Funding Resources In previous financial evaluations, MWMC staff evaluated potential federal and state funding resources for which MWMC might qual~. The SPd~ program was identified as the only realistic alternative, but was determined to be less cost-effective than funding projects through revenue bonds. MWMC would like to retain the option of accessing the SRF program and has developed this comprehensive Facilities Plan to be eligible for SRF monies ff that financing approach becomes more favorable than revenue bonds in the futvrre. 8.6 Recommended Financing Strategy 8.6.1 System Development Charges A thorough revision of the SDC methodology was recently completed for the MWIvIC regional wastewater system and was adopted by the Commission on April 1, 2004. The methodology was developed/n accordance with Oregon SDC legislation (ORS 223.297- 223.314), and with the guidance of a CAC appointed by MWMC. The MWMC SDC Methodology is based on a comb/ned reimbursement and improvement fee structure. In order to calculate the improvement fee portion of the SDCs, it is necessary to allocate the costs of capital projects as follows: Step 1: Allocate projects to facility process components (e.g., prima~ treatment, secondary treatment, etc.) Step 2: Allocate costs by components to system capacity parameters (e.g., average flow, peak flow, etc.) · Step 3: Allocate project costs to improvement type (capacity improvement, performance upgrade, or rehabilitation) ~ Step 4: Allocate costs to user type (existing customers or projected growth) These steps are applied to the $144 million 20-year project list (Alternat/ve 5 - Parallel Primary/Secondary Treatment). Steps 1 and 3 have to be developed on a case-by-case basis for the 20-year project list in question. Step 2 and 4 are inherent in the methodology and occur automatically once the allocations associated with Step 1 and 3 are determined. The basis for allocating projects in the proposed MWMC 20-year project list to the facility MWMC_8 0_REVS.DOC 8-7