My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-06-28_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-06-28_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/28/2011 9:08:16 AM
Creation date
6/28/2011 8:53:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/28/2011
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.
/
110
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
81 The second part of the recommendation is to transfer $600,000 from the Storm water Fund to the <br />82 Water Fund (which currently has a $0 balance) in 2012, creating a sustainable fund balance in <br />83 that fund. <br />84 <br />85 The subcommittee recognizes that this recommendation represents a very significant year -one <br />86 increase in the utility base fees, but for cash flow reasons prefers that to incremental increases, <br />87 which delay projects and increase out -year costs, including maintenance costs for older <br />88 infrastructure. <br />89 <br />90 For reference, with implementation of these recommendations, the typical residential household <br />91 would see their total utility base fee payment per quarter go up by $44.28 in 2012. (Utility usage <br />92 fees would not be impacted.) <br />93 <br />94 The subcommittee believes that it is appropriate to refer these proposed rate changes to the <br />95 Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Commission for their review and comment. <br />96 <br />97 <br />98 Total Impact of Recommendations. <br />99 <br />100 The proposed subcommittee recommendations contained in the June 13 and June 20 memos are <br />101 graphically represented, superimposed on the earlier graph of the problem (Figure 1 above), as <br />102 follows: <br />103 <br />104 <br />105 <br />106 <br />107 <br />108 <br />109 <br />110 <br />111 <br />112 <br />113 <br />114 <br />$250,000,000 <br />$200,000,000 <br />$150,000,000 <br />$100,000,000 <br />$50,000,000 <br />N co Ln lD N 00 cn O M lf1 lD N 00 01 O <br />N N N N N N N N N N M M <br />O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O <br />N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />Cumulative <br />New Funding <br />From New <br />Revenues <br />Cumulative <br />New Funding <br />From Existing <br />Operations <br />1 Cumulative <br />Current <br />Funding <br />Cumulative <br />Projected <br />Costs <br />Figure 2. With Recommended Solutions All Funds. The red bars represent cumulative <br />annual capital costs, while the green area represents cumulative projected current annual <br />budgeted capital funding. The light blue area represents cumulative projected new funding from <br />new revenues. The narrow purple area between the green and light blue areas represents <br />cumulative new funding from operational budget cuts. All figures are in 2011 dollars. <br />As can be seen, even with the subcommittee recommendations of both the June 13 and June 20 <br />memos, significant work remains primarily in the Parks and Streets capital funding areas, <br />which are not addressed by these recommendations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.