My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/08/2002 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2002
>
05/08/2002 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:46:02 AM
Creation date
1/10/2014 11:05:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
5/8/2002
Year
2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Council Minutes of 5/8/2002 <br />spends $31 million while North Olmsted spends $44 million. On the state "report <br />,~,, card," North Royalton scored 27 out of 27 while North Olmsted scored 21 out of 27. <br />Mr. O'Grady said that North Olmsted's spending is in the bottom one-third of all the <br />schools in the county. However, the scoring of 21 out of 27 is in the top one-third. <br />We have much to be proud of. <br />• Mr. Miller noted that Mr. Pangrac had previously come to Council with concerns <br />regarding the cost of water and had asked how can water on the shores of Lake Erie <br />cost so much more than water in the deserts of Arizona? He could not answer that <br />question, so he contacted Julius Ciaccia, the Commissioner of Water for the City of <br />Cleveland. Mr. Ciaccia responded with a letter which reads in part: "First of all, <br />while Arizona is largely an and climate, Phoenix gets its water supply from three <br />separate river sources and does not seem to have significant water shortage issues. in <br />fact, they discount their summer rates to accommodate high water consuming air <br />conditioning units. 5o the fact that this is a desert environment, currently water <br />supply is not an issue. In comparing the suburban rates of the two systems we <br />compazed them on the basis of a typical customer that uses 7,480 gallons of water a <br />month, which we then looked at over a yeaz period. This showed that the typical <br />Cleveland customer in North Olmsted paid $295.04 a yeaz for water while a similar <br />customer in Phoenix would pay $172.40. So indeed applying all the variables of the <br />Phoenix rate, their water would in fact seem cheaper. Please keep in mind this is not <br />an in-depth analysis. It's understandable that the initial reaction is how can a desert <br />community have cheaper water? I believe I responded to the fact that they appear to <br />have ample supply. However, there are significant other factors that are at play. <br />First, Cleveland is chazged with maintaining a system that is 150 yeazs old compared <br />to the newer Phoenix system. This in itself logically dictates that we will carry much <br />higher maintenance costs. Secondly, Phoenix's land azea is flat, while Cleveland's <br />water system must pump upwards from 575 feet above sea level at Lake Erie to an <br />elevation of 1,300 feet in the far reaches of the system. This requires mare pumping <br />equipment, electrical costs and staffing. Indeed, Cleveland's costs aze minimal for <br />accessing and producing potable water, but all of ow major costs are in operations <br />and maintenance of an aging and complex delivery system. Sincerely, Julius <br />Ciaccia, Jr., Commissioner" (A copy of the letter will be provided to Mr. Pangrac.) <br />Mr. Pangrac said, in light of that information, he would ask that North Olmsted look <br />for another water source and suggested the City of Avon. <br />Ann Whitney, 4540 Carsten Lane, wanted to know the status of the light at Driscoll. <br />Mayor Musial said the contract should be let very shortly. The difficulties with that <br />particular system is that the poles that hang over the street must be engineered and <br />constructed based upon the utilization and locality where they are to be positioned. We <br />aze hoping to have the light put in before the start of the school year. Also, the monies <br />will not be available until the first week of June. We are moving forward. Finance <br />Director Copfer explained the note borrowings were passed by Council at a special <br />meeting on April 30. By law, they have to sit for 30 days before the borrowing can <br />occur. The city will go out to the market on Monday, June 3. At that point, the contracts <br />will be ready to be signed. The administration is working towazd that date to then be <br />able to move forward. Mrs. Whitney asked who would be the person overseeing the <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.