WSP03702 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CASE STUDIES 35 Municipalities. Capital improvement needs for the municipalities approxi- mate one-third of total capital needs. However, financial resources to fund these expenditures are more limited than in the case of either the school districts or counties. Shown below is a comparison of capital needs versus debt limits and pos- sible funds available from water and sewer tap fees: Municipal capital needs General obligation debt limit Tap fees (present rates) Millions of Dollars Low Medium High $ 7.7 $19.8 $49.3 11.1 14.1 20.2 4.4 9,4 23.0 In the case of municipalities, there is little incentive to finance capi- tal improvements through general obligation debt. The burden of repayment cannot be passed on to energy companies. Tap fees are a more reasonable source of funds. In general, it would ap- pear that if tap fees (in excess of the cost of tap installations) are earmarked for capital improvements, or servicing of water and sewer reve- nue bonds, the magnitude of the municipal financing problem is reduced by one-third to one-half. Additionally, the incidence of burden is more evenly placed on new residents--those requiring the additional services. ~ ~ ~ I Other potential revenue sources to finance municipal capital needs are sales tax increases, direct aid from energy developers, Environmental Pro- tection Agency grants and state and federal assistance. Municipalities will be the most vulnerable to phasing or lead time problems. Given pre- sent circumstances, front-end financing for municipal facilities will not be available on a timely basis in energy-impacted communities. Hous i ng The magnitude of new housing required in the case study areas was esti- mated using the population and household estimates, income levels and type of employment of workers (construction, plant operation or mining, 0,/-.:> ...1