My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-11-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2013
>
2013-11-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/22/2013 8:27:37 AM
Creation date
11/22/2013 8:15:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/26/2013
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
310 discount, an increase of 400 households over the past five (5) years for <br />311 water /sewer base fees. Mr. Miller recognized that Roseville was home to a lot of <br />312 seniors and with the number of baby boomers in their 50's, it was possible that the <br />313 program could see an increase of 40% - 45% over the next decade. <br />314 Unfortunately, Mr. Miller observed that some other customer had to make it up. <br />315 <br />316 While the City Council has discussed this program, to -date they have left the <br />317 program alone. Mr. Miller advised that, if the intent of the discount program was <br />318 that younger households were subsidizing older households, then this program <br />319 was more than meeting those goals and objectives and working wonderfully. <br />320 However, if not, Mr. Miller suggested a serious look at the program to determine <br />321 whether it's achieving the desired outcome. Mr. Miller asked that the PWETC <br />322 provide their thoughts to the City Council. <br />323 VF4v& <br />324 Chair Vanderwall stated that, if this program went from the current eligibility <br />325 requirements to means, poverty income guideline- based, he would want a more <br />326 detailed analysis as to what rates would support such a program. Even though <br />327 that may mean that the base rate would be reduced for some and increased for <br />328 others currently receivin e discount since some seniors would still meet <br />329 poverty guidelines, Chai anderwall opined that he thought that was the right <br />330 step to take to make the p gram and rate structure more equitable; and applicable <br />331 to all ages and households, no matter their age, but simply based on income. <br />332 <br />333 Member DeBen et noted that the conjured image for some time has been that all <br />334 senior citizens living on a fixed income have a hard time making end meet. <br />335 However, Member DeBenedet opined that the actual reality may be that the <br />336 younger families or households may also be living on a fixed income, with limited <br />337 savings, and actually having a harder time making ends meeting. Member <br />338 DeBenedet spoke in support of a means tested program; again recognizing that <br />339 just becaus was a senior citizen -didn't mean he necessarily qualified for a <br />340 discount when someone younger with fewer resources may better qualify for such <br />341 a discount. Member DeBenedet also noted that, in recognizing that Roseville's <br />342 older infrastructure needed to be addressed and the City was now catching up <br />343 with providing a sustainable program, in turn some of the City's senior citizens <br />344 had been using that infrastructure longer at a discounted rate. Member <br />345 DeBenedet sought additional federal poverty threshold guidelines from staff <br />346 specific to Roseville. <br />347 <br />348 Mr. Miller advised that the guidelines were based on a sliding scale, depending on <br />349 the number of persons in a household, and based on adjusted gross income. <br />350 <br />351 Member DeBenedet further supported dropping or significantly reducing the <br />352 senior discount, while maintaining the discount for those with limited incomes. <br />353 <br />354 Chair Vanderwall spoke in support of a revised discount program at 125% to <br />355 200% of income guidelines, not just at poverty level; however, he noted that it <br />Page 8 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.