Laserfiche WebLink
forms of government that have to be followed. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca referred to Option B and inquired as to how the rates will <br />be determined if the system cost is high with a limited number of users and <br />would that rate be comparable to rates in surrounding communities. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that it would be like any other business; in the beginning <br />years not much money is made and the investment is recovered through future <br />customers. Historically, utility systems have been subsidized by government <br />because it is unpopular to charge a rate to cover the cost of operation. In <br />the future, the rates will probably increase because government can no longer <br />afford to subsidize to the same degree. Ramsey may have to take one of the <br />first steps to charge rates that more closely reflect the cost of operating a <br />sewer and water utility. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca stated that if promoting development is the intent, then <br />the utilities have to be provided in an attractive manner. Councilmember <br />DeLuca inquired if the water system could be funded strictly from landfill <br />tipping fees. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley replied that information available suggests that the Minnesota <br />Statute that establishes tipping fees would permit that kind of investment; it <br />would have to be determined if it is fair and equitable to pay for the entire <br />system with tipping fees. The City has the opportunity to use tax increment <br />financing, which may not always be there; tipping fees will be there in <br />the future for other areas needing services. The information received says it <br />would be more appropriate to put tipping fees in the general fund to use for <br />operating a water system to respond to the argument that the entire hosting <br />community is burdened. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich brought up for consideration a point of whether or not it would be <br />fair to use the landfill fund to pay for a water system to enhance property <br />values in the Industrial area and not in the residential area. It could be <br />argued that the landfill is a detriment to the entire city and not just those <br />properties immediately adjacent to the landfill who are already covered by <br />Superfund and other State agencies. The added costs for a water system created <br />by having to locate the well two miles from a landfill would be an appropriate <br />use for tipping fees. <br /> <br />Councilmember DeLuca inquired if the sewer development is within Ramsey's <br />allocated capacity. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka replied that the City is only using a fraction of it's capacity at <br />present; there is plenty of capacity to allow for expansion. <br /> <br />Steve Gorecki stated that has not been a lot of discussion regarding a time <br />frame for connection with Option B. He feels that 30 years maximum provided in <br />Chapter 444 will not deter development; that increased taxes due to <br />availability of services will encourage landowners to develop. <br /> <br />Council consensus is that staff schedule a special meeting between the affected <br />property owners and City Council to present Options A and B to the property <br />Sp Council/il-18-86 <br /> <br />Page 5 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />