Thankfully the Water Treatment plant came in under budget as I have stated before so it did not have a negative impact on the water fund....
Some have asked why not just raise tax rates to pay the debt. Two reasons I have for that is it hides the reasons for the fee increase and money raised by taxation for the general fund can be spent any way the Council directs. First item is this project was saddled to the sewer/water fund originally as it was an infrastructure project. These fees were to pay for this project as the then Mayor and Council gambled that well over a 100 new houses would be built each and every year for 10 years.
The other reason is the Council can say we are collecting money through taxation for this or that but spend it on something else and still have the debt problem. If the money is raised through a sewer fee it has to be spent on the project and only sewer type projects as mandated by State law.
2 comments:
What you are talking about is collective punishment.Where is the proof that 100 houses were to be built every year? The article you are a part of in the states largest paper makes us look like a bunch of losers. I heard a comment the other day and now I know it is true, you have never met a camera that you didn't like.....
The Mayor and Council majority at the time voted to accept all that debt.... they are the ones that put us all on the hook.... there is no other solution the debt has to be paid... you want to be mad be mad at them...The debt was to be funded by over 100 I believe 140 or so houses... the proof is in the council resolutions that were passed at the time... this is not in dispute... So I and John Bettendorf and Greg Owens and Mark Rojas and all the others that were part of the story made ISanti looking bad really... we are just being honest about and transparent.
Post a Comment