Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />FINANCING <br /> <br />The cost for this work will require financing of nearly all, if not <br />all, of the cost. <br /> <br />The financial analysis herein assumes that Gould Reservoir will be <br />enlarged with a loan for the full amount from the CWCB. The <br />enlargement would yield additional storage of about 4,000 acre- <br />feet, with the assumption that the water users would pay the same <br />amount each year regardless of whether the water is available in <br />dry years. Repayment options are shown in Table 3, assuming a 100% <br />loan; if the District can include some cash the loan amount would <br />be reduced. <br /> <br />None of the loan Options result in a price per acre-foot that can <br />be repaid. Even no interest for 40 years is nearly $50 per acre- <br />foot. Roughly $30 per acre-foot is the maximum reasonable amount <br />for irrigators in the area. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />The cost for enlargement of Gould Darn and Reservoir a~pears to be <br />greater than the irrigators ability to repay uSLng today's <br />financing scenarios, which confirms the findings described in the <br />PRC report. Also, the cost does not address the probability of re- <br />operating the ditch water, which may be difficult. <br /> <br />Based on the cost of the enlargement and the problems with re- <br />operation of the existing water supplies, a financially feasible <br />method to enlarge Gould Darn and Reservoir cannot be identified. <br /> <br />No further study is recommended. <br /> <br />If major rehabilitation of the Gould Dam is required in the future <br />to maintain the existing storage, then an enlargement should be <br />considered. <br /> <br />Gould Dam <br /> <br />8 <br />