Laserfiche WebLink
•P' <br />i — <br />NAVARRE WATER PLANT PUBLIC HEARING <br />MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 23,1997 <br />Jabbour responded that 2/3 of the costs are paid based on usage, $200,000 would come from water <br />fund reserves and $277,000 from an internal loan to be repaid through future water bills. He added <br />that water rates would have to go much higher to fund the entire project through water payments. <br />The City still needs to determine how the assessment would be collected. He added that this would <br />be discussed at an assessment hearing. The current hearing is to determine if the project should go <br />forward. <br />Roxann Beisch, 3436 Livingston Avenue, stated it was difficult to agree to spend money over the <br />next 5 years if the people decide they don't want to pay for the project in the proposed manner. <br />Jabbour responded that the City is not obligated to proceed with the project until after the assessment <br />hearing. There is also a period of time where property owners can oppose the assessment. She also <br />felt she has had good water up until the 1-2 years. The taste of drinking water in other cities has <br />been bad, which is the only way she could determine if Orono has good water or not. <br />Joe Forrer, 2655 Pheasant Road, suggested exploring other means of softening the water rather than <br />salt. Roushar responded that potassium chloride rather sodium chloride has been used in some <br />homes. Other methods are membrane filtration, which is relatively new technology, and reverse <br />osmosis. All methods are more expensive than ion exchange softening. With the existing water plant <br />design, using salt is the most cost effective. Larger plants like Miimeapolis or Bloomington use a <br />lime/soda ash process. <br />Forrer questioned if salt would always be available in the future. Roushar responded that salt can <br />be delivered inexpensively by water from the salt flats in New Orleans and it seems there would be <br />an unlimited supply of salt water available in the Louisiana salt flats from the ocean. <br />Jabbour asked why the City of Tonka Bay uses the lime/soda ash process. Roushar responded that <br />lime is an option but more expensive. Another factor is sludge that is produced from the lime <br />process which has to be disposed of. <br />McDermott asked if there were any plans to expand the area of users. Jabbour responded there <br />definitely was not. <br />Pam Peters, 3640 Togo Road, stated the water quality is good. She commended the Council for <br />acting on this matter before it becomes a problem. She did not feel $350 was unreasonable but <br />would not want to pay 5 years of interest. She agreed with others that the assessment should be done <br />on a usage basis. Jabbour responded that the homeowner is not required to pay the assessment over <br />5 years with interest through taxes but would have the option to do so. Previously the City auditor <br />advised Council to increase water rates to prepare for improvements. If additional money was to <br />come from the water billing, rates would probably have to increase another 35%.