My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC - Minutes - City Council - 2/18/2014
>
City Clerk
>
Permanent Records
>
Permanent
>
CC - Minutes - City Council - 2/18/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2020 12:15:08 PM
Creation date
11/12/2018 2:34:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC - Minutes
Department
City Clerk
Sub
Clerk Records
Content
Minutes
Committee Status
Current
Document Type
City Council
Meeting Type
SPECIAL
Meeting Date
2/18/2014
Retention
Permanent
Retention Type
Permanent
Security
Public
Scanner
Conversion
Scan Date
3/24/2014
Record Series
GS1016, #10260
Conversion Meeting Type
SPECIAL
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Prescott City Council <br />Special Meeting February 18, 2014 <br />Page 4 <br />Mr. Rheem noted that reimbursement of Streets Fund for debt incurred from previous <br />improvements is not allowed and the City does not currently have identified capacity <br />expanding projects in the area of streets. He said the City is restricted in the service <br />area on how the money is spent and restricted in what the money may go towards. <br />There is no additional capacity improvements programmed in the five year Capital <br />Improvement Projects <br />Mr. McConnell said it was confusing; if the fees were adopted, the City would be <br />keeping impact fees but there would be no projects. <br />Mr. Rheem continued with Utility Fee Components and said that fees are tied to the <br />capacity of the major facilities and are different from street fees. <br />Mr. McConnell said the Infrastructure Improvement Plan is a conservative plan that has <br />been scaled back. He said the anticipated population growth is reasonable. He noted <br />that the City of Prescott has enough land within its existing city limits to exhaust its <br />available water without annexing any more property. <br />There was a discussion about the water system fee. <br />Councilman Arnold asked if the City of Prescott were to look toward centralization of the <br />wastewater treatment plant in the next few years, would the Council and staff have to <br />re-evaluate the fees. Mr. McConnell said yes, as they are also required to re-evaluate <br />the fees every five years. <br />Mr. Giardina continued the discussion with preliminary fees versus the fees the City of <br />Prescott has in place. He noted that the fees that are labeled as preliminary are the <br />maximum allowable fees. The Council is free to adopt any fee up to that amount. He <br />noted that the new legislation said that if a police fee, for instance, were adopted, it <br />would have to be assessed to all land use categories. <br />He then discussed preliminary impact fee examples. <br />Next Steps <br />Mr. Giardini showed a schedule with everything geared toward the August 1, 2014 <br />effective date. He said fees can be charged anytime after that date. <br />Mr. McConnell said that the February 25, 2014 date was to consider. The adoption of <br />the IIP and LUA, but that adoption does not commit Council to adopt a fee. <br />Jon Paladini, City Attorney, noted that if new fees do not go into effect August 1, 2014, <br />the old fees do not continue. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.