Laserfiche WebLink
<br />question is - is the water coming because of the potential for <br />contamination? And if that's the case, why are we paying <br />$50.00 a foot for it? If that's not the case, we really find <br />ourselves in a Catch-22 - the people to be served by this <br />line. We're afraid of contamination - weire concerned about <br />the water - but yet I'm sure there's no one in the room that <br />would like to pay $50.00 a foot for it. <br /> <br />MR. JAMES WINIECKI, 4471 Highway 10: How much was charged <br />per foot when the water went up 96? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I believe the rate was $13.00 plus - <br />close to $14.00.a foot. <br /> <br />MAYOR WOODBURN: <br /> <br />(Inaudible) along 10 there. <br /> <br />MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: I would assume - of course, it's <br />hard to tell because that wasn't included in the improvement - <br />the COuncil did consider a very large water improvement at <br />that time. I don't recall what percentage the Council deter- <br />mined to be picked up by the City. <br /> <br />MR. JAMES WINIECKI: That's close - $13.00 or $14.00 a <br />foot - which leads into my next question. We shared in that <br />cost. I believe our portion was about $600 or $700. Now <br />you're asking us to pick up a full 100% assessment. Why <br />aren't these other people being asked - the rest of the <br />village - to share in the cost? I don't quite understand that. <br />We're going to pay $50.00 or $60.00 a foot when we helped pay <br />for their water. Why isn't the rest of the village helping <br />us to pay for it? <br /> <br />MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: Your Honor, there was an area <br />charge of $419.46 per acre on the properties in between - <br />right in the area of the current proposed watermain. The <br />Council assessed those people an area charge because of the <br />proximity of the watermain being constructed. In other words, <br />it will help offset bringing watermain to that area. Had the <br />eight inch watermain gone in at that time, the Council most <br />likely would have charged a front foot cost more than $14.00 <br />a front foot, but I don't believe the Council would have <br />charged an acre charge at that time. <br /> <br />MR. WINIECKI: Couldn't we go back and charge all the <br />other residents an acre charge to help pay for ours? <br /> <br />MR. CHRISTOFFERSEN: That's entirely up to the Council. <br />To go back and charge somebody else an acreage charge - <br />they have already paid an acreage charge and a front footage <br />charge. Only those people beyond (inaudible). We can't go <br />back and charge. <br /> <br />MR. DWIGHT CARLSON, 4345 Highway 10: \~at accounts for <br />that substantial increase - to roughly $50.00 from $14.00? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-5- <br />