With deficits continuing to grow for the City of Greensburg in terms of delivering utility services, City Council approved modest increases in several areas at Monday night’s meeting.
With the basic water rate having been a charge of $11.95 for the first 3,000 gallons and $1.60 per 1,000 gallons after that level for the last decade, City Administrator Steve Hewitt presented a revised rate of $11.95 for the first 2,000 gallons, followed by $2 per 1,000 gallons up to 10,000 gallons and $2.25 per 1,000 gallons beyond 10,0000 gallons in a given month.
While the council seemed in general agreement with the hike, councilman Brandon Hosheit said he’d like to see the base rate continue to apply to the first 3,000 rather than 2,000 gallons used.
“I’d like to see it stay there so the only people it (increase) hits are the water hogs,” Hosheit commented.
Hewitt said “most of the lower users (of water) were at or below 2,000 gallons a month” before adding he and his staff had no problem with retaining the 3,000-gallon threshold. The council concurred with Hosheit’s request.
Rates for non resident users of city water were adjusted even higher, with $12.50 for the first 3,000 gallons used, $2.25 per 1,000 for the next 7,000 gallons, and $2.50 per thousand beyond. City Attorney Gordon Stull was instructed to prepare an ordinance reflecting the changes for approval at the next council meeting of October 6.
Similar changes in charges for sewer service will also be sought via ordinance at that meeting, the basic rate of $5.39 per month to be raised to $7 a month. Service to users of the City’s sewer system living outside city limits were again set higher, now likely to be raised from $16.17 to a flat $18 a month.
Pointing out that a “lot of cities” base a user’s sewer charges on their monthly water usage, Hewitt said his staff wasn’t recommending Greensburg do the same because “we don’t want to discourage people who are considering returning to the community.” The council agreed to forego the linkage between water consumption and sewer charges.
A measure that was approved by unanimous vote Monday night was charging $950 for tapping a one-inch water line into the City’s water supply, and $1,250 for a two-inch line. In addition a fee of $350 will now be charged for cutting into and then repairing the alternations to the street to accommodate such work.
“These charges would be added to the permit process,” Hewitt said, explaining that contractors typically charge consumers between $1,200 and $1,500 to pay for such permit fees, which until now have only amounted no more than a flat $35 building permit fee from the City.
“Right now a contractor charges over a thousand dollars to cover those fees and pays a whole $35 and pockets the difference,” he said. “So this really isn’t going to cost the resident anymore. It’s just going to cut into the contractor’s profit, while reimbursing the City for its expense.”
The other action waiting finalization via an ordinance at next month’s meeting was renewal of the measure authorizing the City to charge electrical consumers the monthly fuel adjustment costs billed the municipality by the base provider.
“Fuel adjustments have been a problem for a long time, but it’s something we can’t control,” Councilman Gary Goodheart said. “We dropped passing in on to residents not too long ago and we quickly went into the red when we did. I guess we need to educate our customers that we’re just trying to meet our costs when we charge them a fuel adjustment.”
Hosheit attempted to identify the cause of former confusion in regard to the fuel adjustment charges when he said, “Some of the problem was that a former administration and staff couldn’t adequately explain this.”
The fuel adjustment charge varies from month to month based on the fluctuations of the market price of natural gas, which is typically used to generate the power received by the City from its base provider. The higher the fuel adjustment charged the City in a given month, the higher the corresponding charge listed on a resident’s electrical bill the following month. Passing on fuel adjustment costs to consumers is, as Hewitt pointed out, the usual practice of area municipalities.
A spreadsheet provided by Hewitt showed Greensburg’s new charges to be in line with, if not below those of nearby cities, with the new residential sewer rate of $7 per month, for instance, falling below that of Ashland ($14.80 per month), Pratt ($13.68 per month), and Kinsley ($15.55 per month). Ashland, meanwhile, charges residents $12 for the first 1,000 gallons of water used, and $1.65 per 1,000 used beyond.
In other matters…
*Colin Whitley of the Kansas Power Pool spoke guardedly of progress made in Greensburg acquiring a wind-generated source of electricity because of confidentiality requests of one of the two entities seeking to become the developer of the project.
“We’ve ended up with two competing offers and one entity required a confidentiality agreement so I’m limited in what I can say tonight,” Whitley said. He did affirm Hewitt’s assertions of the goal being to build a municipal wind farm that would sell excess electricity back to the KPP, and said both the unnamed entity and NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) had submitted proposals to KPP.
While Greensburg would have to pay the same price as other pool members for electricity purchased from the KPP when wind generation falls short of demand, Whitley pointed out Greensburg’s lower cost of generation—free of natural gas generated fuel adjustment costs—would “help lower the pricing for all members of the pool.”
*Erica Goodman of the tourism committee mentioned the BIGWELL.org web site not being current, and encouraged council to “take a look at the site since the City now owns it. The tourism committee would like to see the City take over responsibility for the site, and it could be passed on to the current Big Well manager.”
*Ruth Ann Wedel asked whether a current census of residents, including income levels was available to help facilitate information concerning affordable housing. “We do know who’s in our city,” Hewitt said. He went on to mention Habitat for Humanity and Mennonite Housing’s cooperative effort with USDA’s self-help housing program providing opportunity for affordable housing.
“A lot of people may not be aware of the programs available,” Councilman Matt Christenson said.
“Work force housing is a problem that will only grow as we begin construction of City Hall and other community projects,” Hewitt added.
Saying it’s been “hard” for employers to keep track of what housing is available for prospective hires, Mayor Bob Dixson answered Wedel’s question of how that information could be made readily available by indicating knowledge of the housing situation in town is primarily the responsibility of employers. Hewitt added it would be possible to ask housing coordinator Laura Stoltenberg to submit a monthly report concerning the matter.
*City Attorney Gordon Stull told council of its need to bring the city court into conformity with charges for costs now allowed by the State. Council responded by asking Stull to bring an ordinance to that effect to the next meeting. They also agreed to consider his suggestion they look into raising the fee for staff help in obtaining open record information for the public.
*Letter of condition paperwork facilitating $900,000 in grants from USDA for the construction of the new City Hall was completed, as well as a contract allowing MVP to serve as the architectural firm of choice for engineering firm PEC in designing the City’s public works facility. “Our goal is to have our guys in that new building by the end of 2009,” Hewitt said. Tim Lenz of PEC added it was his expectation that bids on that project could go out by the end of the year.
Greensburg, KS —
