|
City water rates will increase |
|
|
Tuesday, 27 October 2009 |
|
By Rusty Nixon Correspondent PLYMOUTH — To increase or not to increase, that was the question before the Plymouth Common Council regarding water rates. While many — including Councilman Mark Neidig — debated if a raise was the way to go, state statute and the need to improve the utility’s cash position ended up carrying the argument.
The Council voted to pass the ordinance raising water rates over the next two years — about $1.75 each customer of the next two years. Neidig was the lone no vote. At the heart of the matter was the opportunity to refinance water utility bond issues. Such a refinancing would save the city up to 15 percent according to city consultant John Julien of Umbaugh and Associates. In order to refinance those bonds, the city had to assure investors that a projected cash short fall of around $150,000 a year could be made up in a rate increase. While the utility has ample cash reserve to absorb the short fall for the short term, the bond could not be reissued without the cash assurance of a rate increase. State law does not allow the city to inject “Rainy Day” funds to any of its utilities. Neidig questioned whether some kind of cash loan from city investments could be given to the utility to allow for upgrading meters. Currently water meters around the city have long since reached their age of effectiveness and it’s projected that if new meters were installed throughout the city with new meter reading techniques, the amount of money recovered by the city could be considerable. Neidig’s query was based on the possibility of meter replacements being able to capture lost revenue without a rate increase. Superintendent Donnie Davidson assured the Council that a plan was in place to replace the city meters, but being able to do so in even two years with current personnel would be “very aggressive.” Julien also commented that the transfer of public funds was a very complicated maneuver, and that each fund could be considered a “pocket,” saying that the flexibility of taking out of one pocket to put into another was very limited.
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 28 October 2009 )
|