Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />$123,000 remalnlng from Local Affairs' initial $215,000 grant <br />are more than enough to finish the project. The staff has <br />reviewed the capacity of the project at length (both treatment <br />capacity and treated water storage) and has come to the firm <br />conclusion that further expansion of the system cannot be <br />justified at this time under any plausible assumptions as to <br />population growth in Parachute over the next few years. <br /> <br />since I have taken this position, Parachute has advised <br />that it would like to use the second authorization of <br />construciton funds ($200,000) to put the town's summer lawn <br />irrigation system (which consists of small ditches throughout <br />town) in pipe. I do not believe that the legislature's 1981 <br />authorization can in any way be construed to cover sllch a <br />project. This means that reauthorization would be required. <br />However, such a project no longer complies with either the <br />letter or intent of the S.B. 439 (1981 Session) amendments to <br />the construction fund statutes. <br /> <br />Recommendations <br /> <br />I am firmly of the oplnlon that Parachute now has a more <br />than adequate treated water supply system which requires no <br />more Board funding. I therefore recommend that: <br /> <br />(1) The Board authorize the expenditures of the remaining <br />funds from the initial $250,000 for the purpose of <br />completing components of the systems which are now <br />under construction, and <br /> <br />(2) The Board recommend to the General Assembly that the <br />expenditure of $200,000 approved in 1981 be <br />deauthorized. <br /> <br />cc: Steve Schmitz <br />Department of Local Affairs <br /> <br />-3- <br />