Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 19, 2024 10 <br />Mayor Grant added these increases are based off rates, with the exception of the increases from <br />Met Council. Finance Director Yang confirmed. <br />Councilmember Monson asked if the 9% is just a one-time increase. She asked what happens to <br />the fund if we were to do 5% or 8%. <br />Finance Director Yang said she looked at 5% for the next three years. We would have a deficit <br />for the next three years. She proposed the 9% to avoid the deficit. <br />Councilmember Monson said going to 9% to ensure that the fund is equal to what is being spent <br />is important. She would prefer to increase the subsequent years' rates to 4% to ensure that the <br />money is available. <br />Councilmember Holden asked about the surface water funding and wondered when the ponds <br />will be dredged. <br />Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said he has all the dredging projects <br />programmed in the C I P. They should be accounted for in these figures. <br />Councilmember Holden asked if we are still in the positive. She thought it looked like in 2027 <br />there is $800,000. Finance Director Yang confirmed. <br />Mayor Grant outlined that the water meter replacement was included in the water fund. In 2029, <br />there would still be $1.6 million. Finance Director Yang confirmed. <br />Councilmember Holden supports keeping the water fund and the surface water fund at 3%. Then <br />next year all three funds could be 4%. She clarified this year the sanitary sewer would be 9%, <br />because that's what's being charged. <br />Councilmember Monson noted that the size of the water fund and knowing that includes the <br />spend on the large water meter project, she asked is there a reason there is so much money in the <br />water fund. <br />Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the water meter replacement will be <br />around $1.5 million, programed for 2025 and 2026. <br />Councilmember Monson stated it looks like we have $2 million. <br />Councilmember Holden said it is because we have been planning for projects. We were <br />reimbursed by the legislature over $2 million on water projects so we haven't had to spend that <br />money. <br />Councilmember Monson wondered if there was a more efficient way to use the money rather <br />than just letting it sit in the water fund. Could those funds be moved to the sanitary sewer fund? <br />Mayor Grant stated this is an enterprise fund. So he would not support trying to put it someplace <br />else. <br />Councilmember Monson thought this is a lot of money for us to just sit on. <br />