Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />t--.. <br />C', <br /> <br />",e. <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />VII. REHABILITATION & BETTERMENT IR'B) REPAYMENT RESOURCES <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />A preliminary payment capacity analysis has been completed . ~L."IS ~ <br />by Denver Office. The estimated payment capacity on the west ~~'\ <br />side of the Uncompahgre River is $24.65 per acre, while the east 7 ~~ <br />side yields a value of $2.50 per acre. With 49,588 acres located (O~ <br />on the West side and 17,535 acres ,located on the east side, the <br />total payment capacity is/$l,26,6",20-0. <br /> <br />Current obligations lfor-t~~A include annual payments <br />for the original project construction, reserve fund for the <br />project, long term debt to the Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />(CWCB), and payments for the Dallas Creek Project which are <br />scheduled to begin in February 1992. The long term debt to the <br />CWCB will be retired in August 1996. The amount of annual <br />obligations after 1996 are: <br /> <br />original project construction <br />Reserve fund <br />Dallas Creek (with Tri-County) <br /> <br />$ 60,000 <br />50,000 <br />60,000 <br /> <br />TOTAL $170,000 <br /> <br />~,~, _ ~j~,:!~ I\Jo'.(.~. <br /> <br />Average annual OM&R expenses for~the Uncompahgre Project <br />over the last four years averaged '$1,324,7001 A recent estimate <br />indicates that the lining and piping of the-east side canal and <br />lateral systems would save an estimated $214,000 annually in OM&R <br />expenses. Therefore, OM&R expenses would total approximately <br />$1,l10,700 after the improvements were constructed. <br /> <br />The resultant annual repayment ability would be negative <br />(Repayment ability = $1,266,200 - 1,110,700 - 170,000 = <br />-$14,500). Therefore, no assumption has been made that the UVWUA <br />will share a portion of the SO/JU project costs. Participation <br />through the acquisition of a R&B loan to "buy down" any of the <br />less cost effective components would be based on a willingness to <br />pay by the shareholders. <br /> <br />VII. CONCLUSIONS <br /> <br />The primary objective of the study is to reanalyze the <br />financial options for the deferred components of the LGBU and to <br />develop a plan for constructing those components or parts <br />thereof. Information has been presented in this document <br />concerning modifications to the original plans along with up-to- <br />date cost estimates and cost effectiveness comparisons. The next <br />step is up to the decision makers to determine if the assumptions <br />and findings to date are proper and to address the issues listed <br />. below. <br /> <br />21 <br />