CC Min 1989-10-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Janice McOmber, 466 Summit Drive, Redwood City, stated Easter Bowl did not benefit the Emerald Lake Hills area and the cost of its operation should not be charged to Emerald Lake Hills water users. Carole Henley, 157 Springdale Way, Redwood City, reminded Council of the petition with over 900 signatures she submitted August 8, 1989 asking for fair and equitable treatment by Council for Emerald Lake Hills water users; asked Council to respond to her three requests in her letter of September 21, 1989; and asked that a member of the Emerald Lake Hills Homeowners Association be a member of the committee researching the sale of the water system. Mayor Greenalch advised that Carole Henley's requests would be considered at the November 13, 1989 Council meeting. MEMO 10/17/89 Manuel Sotomayor, 12 Riviera Circle, Redwood City advised Council that the amount of money proposed to be raised by the increased multiplier for Emerald Lake Hills water users would amount to $1.68 per month if apportioned to every water user in the water service district and asked Council to look elsewhere for revenues and better ways to acquire water through wells and desalinization. Doug Finlay, 360 Summit Drive, Redwood City pointed out areas on the overhead maps he believed were not actually in the Emerald Lake Hills area; suggested distributing costs on the miles of pipe used was inappropriate; and stated the systems were obviously commingled. Community Development Director Ben Pawloski explained Redwood City is one of twenty -nine contractors with the San Francisco Water Agency and should act in concert with as many other members as possible in conservation methods so as not to jeopardize our future water allotments; and discussed advantages of block rate structure and buy -in fees. General Services Director Fred Sennewald described history and impact of the $2350 installation charge and the $1400 buy -in fee for new water service. Councilman Claire stated the accounting data available was insufficient to to ascertain the cost of water use in Emerald Lake Hills and offered the following motion: M /S: Claire /Buchan to direct staff to prepare enabling legislation to approve the recommendations for meter service charges, water rates, capital facilities fees for new connections, pass- through increases or decreases in wholesale cost of water and service areas and multipliers as presented in subject report, EXCEPT the multiplier for Emerald Lake Hills to remain 1.9 for one year (calendar year of 1990); after one year costs to be reviewed using newly implemented cost accounting procedures and, if necessary, multiplier adjusted. Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 49 10/16/89 Page No. 124 Page 2