Stop-FGUA-in-Florida

Current Board --- Chairman Lea Ann Thomas Assistant County Manager Polk County 330 West Church Street Bartow, Florida 33830 Phone: (863) 534-6031 ----- Robert Nanni Osceola Board of County Commissioners 1 Courthouse Square, Suite 4700 Kissimmee, Florida 34741 Phone: (407) 343-2388 ----- System Manager Robert E. Sheets Phone: (850) 681-3717 ----

Thursday, December 08, 2005

Board OKs water line assessments (Ctrus Springs)

By Dave Pieklik

A county board agreed Monday to allow a utility to implement water line extension fees to make up for trickling profits it says it’s facing due to population growth.

The Citrus County Water and Wastewater Authority voted to allow the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) to assess a $1,910 prepaid fee, or $2,085 fee if applied to tax rolls, for future water line extensions in Citrus Springs. The board had previously agreed in September to impose a $2,068 interim rate while a final rate was determined; the board ruled Monday those residents should get refunded the difference.

The extension fees were approved to address the FGUA’s assertion that it’s losing money on constructing new water lines in the area because of the number of vacant lots that are bypassed. Previously, FGUA officials said they were taking out a $5 million line of credit to pay for the anticipated costs to add water lines to roughly 3,400 lots.“I think everybody realizes we’re kind of on new ground here,” authority chairman Mike Smallridge said of the authority’s approach to resolve the issues presented.The board also denied the utility’s request to allow a “line maintenance fee” in Pine Ridge and Citrus Springs to address large numbers of vacant lots. The fee — $16.55 in Citrus Springs and $37 in Pine Ridge — would be tacked on to residents’ bills to help pay for repairs and construction of water lines in these areas, which the utility indicated was to help recover lost money.

Utilities Regulatory Director Robert Knight said there was no evidence to support the fees.

Board member Cheryl Neff-Phillips also disagreed with the approach, saying if a fee were to be used, FGUA should “make it fair for everyone.”While the board passed most issues unanimously, there were some that caused debate. On the question about if the number of proposed lots to receive water service was appropriate, board members Robert Hnat and Walter Averill felt it wasn’t.

Under FGUA’s plan, the 3,400 lots would be serviced within the next five years, a number that was scaled back from 6,000 lots in the first phase of a six-phase effort to add water to the entire 34,000 vacant lots in the area. Both men suggested there wasn’t a need to build in less populated areas.Board member Ronald Broadbent agreed the number was not appropriate, saying there should be “no building (in other phases) until we figure out if what we’re doing now is appropriate.”No attorneys or spokespeople were present for FGUA, limiting the board to decide upon each issue, rather than let the public or board members discuss options. After the decisions were finalized, Knight said the utility would have 30 days to appeal the decision.

“We’ll see what kind of opposition or claims to a rehearing, if any, are made in that time,” he said.

If there are no appeals from FGUA or residents, the new rates will immediately take effect.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home