Agenda - Council - 07/28/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

10 Minutes CASE #14: DISCUSS POLICY ON KEFUNDINC THE SERVICE AVAILABILITY CRA~GE (SAC) TO NON-SE%IEKED AREAS OF RAMSEY By: Dave Hartley, City Administrator Background~ In late 1986 the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission changed its policy relating to service availability charges (SAC). The new policy is to collect SAC only when the building and/or sewer connection permits are issued and when these facilities have access directly or indirectly to the metropol,.itan disposal system. The change in policy (to collect SAC only if sewer service is available) suggested that a refund program be considered for SAC previously collected from facilities which as yet do not have sewer service. The Commission subsequently approved a voluntary SAC refund program for all or a portion of the eligible units at the amount equal to that paid. The refund program is available during the period of 1987 through 1989. The disposition of any refund is the responsibility of the City. This raises the question, should the City of Ramsey request a reimbursement from the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, and if so, should it be redistributed to the property owners. Here are the options and the pros or cons related to each: Request reimbursement and return the SAC to the current owner. This appears to be the "right thing to do", however, the administrative cost of determining who the current owner is and how much of a refund should be returned could be very great. Additionally, the current owner and/or the City may have to pay a higher SAC rate whenever sewer service is provided. Request reimbursement and not return the SAC to the owners. The City of Ramsey will obviously receive the benefit of the reimbursement program, however, this may result in bad public relations to collect the reimbursement and not return it to its "rightful owner". Furthermore, the future rates will likely be higher than past rates and the City will have to pay the difference whenever sewer service is available and maintaining records for doing so could be costly. Do not request reimbursement of SAC. Here the City does not receive the benefit of the reimbursement program. Similarly, the City does not experience the cost of administering such a reimbursement program. Recommendation: It is the recommendation of Staff that the City not request reimbursement because to do so will result in added cost either now or in the future. Review Checklist: Administrator Attorney Engineer Community Development Director Chief of Police Finance Officer Public Works Superintendent Other