My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-28-16 Utilities
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Committee Meeting Minutes
>
2016
>
Utilities
>
11-28-16 Utilities
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/21/2017 3:42:00 PM
Creation date
2/9/2017 9:52:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Committee Mtg Minutes
City Counci - Date
11/28/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
difference to them, but it might when we go from $3,000 to $5,000 on business. We did meet <br />with the top twenty -five (25) users. We sent letters to set up a meeting with four (4) of them. We <br />calmly sat down with them, went over all this. They understood where we were coming from. <br />We didn't get any strong pushback from the four (4) customers that came in from the top twenty - <br />five (25), and we didn't get any response from the other twenty -one (21). <br />Committeemember Dr. Varner asked, Did you ask how many of them plan on reducing their <br />usage to control their expense? <br />John Julien, Umbaugh and Associates, 112 Ironworks Avenue, Mishawaka, IN, stated that none <br />of them brought up that they would change their usage. <br />Committeemember Dr. Varner stated, We know that's what happened to Noble Americas, <br />though. <br />Mr. Horvath stated, The SBCSC came. One was selling water —they were using our water and <br />then selling it, so there's no change. Then Noble Americas, and Steel Warehouse. <br />Committeemember Davis asked, In dealing with this, whenever expenses go up—to bring it back <br />to the IURC —isn't there a way that when they approve something, they can approve something <br />in different multiple packages instead of always having to approve with a single package? <br />Mr. Horvath clarified for John Julien that the Committee was talking about phasing -in rates. He <br />asked him, Is there any way you can do phased -in rates through the IURC? <br />Mr. Julien responded, The only way to do that is if it's a specific project in a financing and a <br />bond financing. They will recognize that it will potentially take a year to complete the project <br />and the cost associated with that project would have a delay, and that would substantiate a multi- <br />phase increase. Their working principles— except for when there's a project —is approving <br />expenses that are fixed, known, and measurable, and occurring within the next twelve (12) <br />months. That precludes them from looking at it when we know that in the next five (5) years <br />there's going to be these incremental changes that we could accommodate in a multi -phase <br />increase. <br />Committeemember Davis asked, Do other cities not have any phase -in kind of programs? <br />Mr. Julien responded, Only if there's a bonded project. <br />Committeemember Davis responded, But nothing outside of that? <br />Mr. Julien responded, Correct. <br />Committeemember Dr. Varner, So, hypothetically, if we were saying that $5,000,000 is what <br />you were hoping for a cash infusion— <br />Mr. Horvath interjected, We are generating $5,000,000 for capital. It's <br />— <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.