My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090799
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCMIN090799
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:17 AM
Creation date
10/12/1999 5:23:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/7/1999
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
there would be little risk to Pleasanton ratepayers. If the growth happens in two years and <br />no permits are sold, then there is a risk. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if the $67 million figure was accurate. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson did not think so. If Dublin began restricting growth along with other <br />communities, it would take a while before a backlash occurred. The real issue is whether <br />growth stops entirely. If DSRSD's growth is reduced to 20,000 DUE' s instead of 29,000, <br />that can be planned for and will be funded from connection fees, not from the ratepayers. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala referred to one of the charts that indicated 1,400 DUE's per year were <br />predicted. How many years was that for and how many were for Pleasanton? <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson said that covers 25 years and approximately 300 would come from <br />Pleasanton. He clarified that the DUE's are not just dwelling units, but represents <br />commercial units as well. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico indicated there are 12,000 dwelling units that have a vested right to build. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver indicated the discussions have been regarding how to insulate the <br />ratepayers and guarantee the debt so that existing users don't pay for the expansion. He <br />referred to Mr. Lawson's presentation to LAVWMA and the four-year cycle in which a <br />downturn in connections could be compensated for in the next few years. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson explained that the analysis took the worst four-year period since 1982. <br />It predicted that the downturn would repeat two years from now and then there would be a <br />recovery which would make up what was not sold. That that would happen again. That is <br />what protects the existing ratepayers. The $1,600 add on is to protect the ratepayers. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico believed that in addition to the $1,600 add on, there is still a large reserve <br />to protect the ratepayers. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson said there is two year's worth of debt service or $35 million. The <br />proposed fee of $9,900 is designed so that Pleasanton has its planned growth for the next <br />two years. If suddenly only 35% of expected DUE sales or sold in the next four years, there <br />is still $35 million in the fund. Once you get through the next expansion phase, there will <br />start to be too much money collected. The debt service is a fixed fee and the connection <br />rates will have been adjusted each year for inflation. At some point, it can no longer be <br />justified. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver stated that the analysis said after eight years, the pressure is off. If you <br />get the predicted growth. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 17 09/07/99 <br />Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.