CCR1981173RESOLUTION 173-81
RESOLUTION RELATING TO MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN
SEWAGE DISTRICT CONTRACT FEES
re WHEREAS, a part of the City of Muskego is included within
the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District area, and
WHEREAS, the Area-wide Water Quality Management Plan for South-
eastern Wisconsin, adopted by Southeastern Wisconsin Regional
Planning Commission on July 12, 1979, provides that a portion of
the City of Muskego will be served by the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District, and
WHEREAS, the City of Muskego has entered contract negotiations
with representatives of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District, and
WHEREAS, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District has pro-
posed a contract that bases Muskego's share of the capital cost
recovery on a formula based on equalized valuation, and
WHEREAS, the City of Muskego has found that the proposed equalized
valuation formula is unfair and inequitable, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Muskego wishes to
advise the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District that their
proposal to recover capital cost on a formula based on equalized
valuation is totally unacceptable and further, that the only
population and flow where the participant contract community is
acceptable formula for capital cost recovery must be based on
Metropolitan Sewerage District facility.
actually charged for its share of the usage of the Milwaukee
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of
Muskego, Waukesha County, Wisconsin, objects to any formula for
distributing capital cost recovery amongst the participants
whether contractual or otherwise, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District's proposed sewer rehabilitation plan other than
a formula that is based on flow.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Muskego's objections
to the equalized valuation formula are based on the following,
1. The equalized valuation method taxes property with no
relationship to sewer need or use. For example, farm fields
barns, marshes, woodlands, and any other undeveloped lands within
the service district.
no incentive for a participating community to remove its clear
water infiltration or in any way make its contribution more
efficient.
2. A plan based on equalized valuation provides absolutely
a system without taking into account the actual need. For
example, it can be easily shown that a single family residence in
Muskego, with an equalized valuation of $160,000.00 would require
with the same equalized valuation in the City of Milwaukee. only a fraction of the sewer service of a multi-family unit
3. Equalized valuation is an arbitrary method of financing
Resolution #173-81
Page 2.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of
Muskego does hereby declare its objection to the equalized Valuation
formula and does hereby advise the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District that if a contract is to be executed between
the City of Muskego and the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District, capital cost recovery must be based on the actual use
(determined by flow) by residents of the City of Muskego.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 1981
PUBLIC SEWER COMMITTEE uy A? ALL
Ald, Wayne Salentine
Ald. Robert Klenz
,
ATTEST