|
<br />~
<br />
<br />00181'71
<br />
<br />>:-
<br />
<br />. '~~~~:,.7
<br />
<br />'ViM;' Ocl~'24~ i'973:0~rfVe~;tiJlo.
<br />
<br />,>.-,".-""'",- ,
<br />. ..~ .~'<I!".-,-_.._--.._- _.-:-
<br />
<br />-.,...... rr "".~,
<br />
<br />" 6 'Rotky'Moun'tain'N{vs
<br />
<br />Water board bond ',hreat
<br />Charter ~i@lation
<br />
<br />seen as
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />(Continue-d from I'ago 5) first alternative. But for suburban userlt the in.
<br />crease' could be. substantial. The average
<br />-"to Sell-watelcu1side-Denver's limHs. Since then - sububan home- wate bill, now about ~100
<br />the terl"ihu'y it serves has grown rapIdly...... . 'year, almost certainly go to at least $200.
<br />! At present, the bo<1:t'd holds _contracts to . The chartet."says 'Denver residents can be
<br />serve 175. square miles outside Denver. The cahrged Dilly "for those improvementS" related
<br />area served by the boait'd has a potential popu~ directly to lhe city's projected needs.. _. _. -d
<br />In!.ioll or morn Ihan 1,6 inllJiOJ\'ill'ilJmosl twlc. Th~se are: '
<br />that served now. The firflt phll8n or (hc-FooU.lIJs Treatment
<br />PROfJJ~cT)~[) GROWTlt IN AREA. , . Plant amI accompanying facllitlc&-$56.1 mU.
<br />The board's problem -is simple: It hasn't got. lion ,. ,
<br />enough water, treatment capacity or transmis-, Storage,-pllmpin!:t" (l,ntl transnllssl_on fac1l1. .
<br />sian ,facilities to keep pace .with projected ties costing a maximum of about $14 million. '
<br />growth in the area it has.chosen to serve. The balance of the complete plan. including
<br />But two charter provisions_-limit the extent the Eagle-Piney, Williams Fork and East-Gore.
<br />to which Denver<' custofllers can be charged .for.. ... diversion. projects, the recycling program and
<br />.~ improvements in the system. _'_ - additional treatment and delivery facilities are
<br />The first states that rates in Denv.er,ms.y be- clearly required to -fUrnish new users outside.
<br />'"" high enough ~o pay for- "b.etterments"'including ,Denver. . '. . _ ,.
<br />; "those reasonably ,required ~ _the anticipated :~, If increases were apportioned on this- basis
<br />~- "--. growth of- the Denver metropolitan area, .and to - inside. and ouside pie city, Denver ,customers
<br />-------;o:..provide for Denver's general Welfare." . - ,would have a clear advaJ;'ltage. Their.-share.:
<br />J The second, and far more .limiting;' secti.d .could .be financed with tap fees and charges
<br />states plainly that in signing contracts to pr~. . ..levied against developers inside the city and a_
<br />vide \Vater. to the suburbs . each contract must ,_I:ate increase of 30 to 50 pe:y cent..
<br />contain ways- to cut the water _off "to .enable the. ,-;. ..suburban art;!as,. on the other hand, will
<br />.~. board to-.provi<;Ie olin' adequate s~pply of .wate'f ._.have to",put up tlie.lions share 9f tap and-devel-."
<br />_ . to the people of Denver;!' .. __ - . ;-, . - '... .. .._ oper fees antl ft:.lnd. the;,:ba1ance of ~e..prograllJ..-.
<br />,The suburban user' must-: pay usuffICient. Moreover, the ~uburbs.-would face the'prospect"
<br />money to fully .reimburse the people of Denver of paying for the reJl?aining $39.9 million of the
<br />-for the cost 'Of furnishing..1he water" :plus an... .Eagle.Piney.praject.sometime in the future.
<br />"" ;. addition~. amount. ~o be;..d~termine4. bY _the..... ~3..0r;the b.ond .ssue,.could faU:_ and.the_
<br />board... ,-., -. . .- . _' .-. '-board;a.void levying' massive' rate 'increases
<br />;: . _Depending. on the .elecUon !~sults, th~ wat~r. )n the-_-8ub_urbs.. by:prP'Viding no furUter sen'.
<br />board can eI'Q.bark on three different courses ice outside Denver. That .is the_least.likely:-.
<br />after Nov;" 6: . ,. _ '--.:, . .. .'.-:. '_.~ . .: __! ~alternative... ...: . _ "
<br />1..If the bonds are approv.ed, ft.-Will-launch . F:or "9n..e .thing, f_ree~jng_.the system outside'
<br />, its $368 million prC!gram. -. ...: : '. . ,- .,.. .-:- .the.city would be politically explosiv~.-
<br />Water. bills 'inside arid outside. of Denver will"::._. Suburban-Iegislator~, already jealous .of the I
<br />go up, since the bOard has already approved a.___:..:_;_ water board's pow~r, :would be. -sure to .step ~p"
<br />program. of small, annu.aI.. increases under '. their. ~fforts_ to dismantle .i~.present ~tructure
<br />which, by 1984, rates will be about 22 per cent., and make it responsive to regional interests.
<br />higher than they are now., - ., . But ~. this: course. were, chos~; the- present
<br />;. The board and other bond issues proponen.ts. .service. area.....:.Denvev plus a1re~dy -connected
<br />. have justified these increasesJn tenns_ofrising. outside.'--customers-would ""b.e- fased with the
<br />operating costs caused by innation: ' .need for $~OO'mi1Iion. in improy~mepts.Jnllud~ ,
<br />,. . A. question and answer style campaign flyet . ing the .first '-st~ge. of the Footh~ns pla~t. -~d
<br />;, prepaFed by the board, for-exa'mple, asks the ,t. stora.ge, transm~sslOn- 8l1d. pumpmg facilities.
<br />question, "Will my water'rates be increased if . These could b~ ~manced WIth a short .term rate
<br />" the. bond issue passes". . ... increase_ ot about 50 .per cent whic4 co:uJd, be
<br />. "No,"_reads the printed answer. "However;. . removed after ~bout.!Ive year~. .
<br />. with the costs of goods and services continuing LONG.RANGE PROGRAl\I
<br />to spiral, -wat.er rates. will have to b~. adju~ted. ' While improbable. this eventuality can't be
<br />to reflect increased operating costs.". ,ruled out. ., ' "
<br />"". The. board's own '.financ~al .anaIY~is, h~w- ..:~, The Denver'.uague of Women Voters has
<br />. ever, dIrectly contradicts .thIS contenti?n. F~g- .. 'pledged to oppose any, effort by the board to
<br />~;. ures sh?~ _.that .the t:at.e. In?reased .~.Il~ ra~s~.. : proceed with its long-range program without
<br />$51.6 mllhon .d1}rmg .the next 1-~ years. of WhI.ch voter approvaI~ This tesolve presumably in-
<br />only ~10.2 mIlll?n Will. ~e r,eqUlred to meet; m." 'eludes the willingness- to seek a charter amend-
<br />creaSIng operatmg defIcits., . . ment restricting the board'_B :power to supply
<br />. C?nse.quently cus~ome:s WIll actually _ ~e..' water to outlying areas. ,_.. .
<br />contrIbutmg $41.4 million dlrectIy-to the board S Neither of the alternatives, which the-board
<br />expansion program. . will face if the bond issue fails are politically
<br />2. If the honds faH, _the board coul<1 choils-e attractive~ Freezing the system -could prQvoke
<br />to launch Its improvement program with a bitter .reaction frod suburban officials and
<br />massive rate inc.reases. . -.. massive rate iricrease~ not experienced wIthin
<br />. Under t~e charter, Denvet users shouldn't, .the\~ityaren'tlik~~.tg be:welcomedwlthopen J.
<br />,; be hit much. harder than they WQuld under the___~ ... .~:m~~ \..-. ._: : .
<br />
<br />,-\
<br />
<br />,-
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />-
<br />,
<br />
|