SAN ANGELO – The San Angelo City Council meets in special session Tuesday to conduct a strategic planning meeting which includes a possible 'Street Use Fee' of $6.75 per month added to residential water bills to pay for street maintenance.
That's an $81 per year increase in every residential water bill.
According to the agenda for the strategic planning meeting, the Street Use Fee would provide funding for continued street repairs and improvements without increasing property taxes or adding debt.
See the images below provided by COSA staff:
The strategic planning workshop includes presentations from staff on infrastructure, economic development and public safety.
The San Angelo City Council meets in special session Tuesday Afternoon at 3 p.m. in the McNease Convention Center.
The meeting is open to the public.
Comments
What happened to the money received from selling all of COSA's road repair equipment? I wouldn't pay another dime to them until that question is answered.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkSo the city mentions they want to do this so they don't have to raise property tax rate, well with all the new property evaluations the city is going to get a large increase of income so I think they need to lower our water rates and fix the streets with the added property tax they will receive next year, not charge us more to live here. With inflation going through the roof it is hard enough to get by without the city raping us even more.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkObviously COSA thinks Biden hasn't done enough damage to the economy and placed sufficient hardship upon the American public they want to help!!
The fact this has even been proposed warrants voting everyone of them OUT OF OFFICE.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkMy water bill is already over $100 a month, and it's just me. The government in this town has become so corrupt.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkIts a regressive tax increase. It also assumes that all property owners have the same number of vehicles and they use the streets equally in the number of miles driven. If it was funded through property taxes it would not be regressive and seniors over 65 would be protected because of their freeze on city property taxes.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkHow about properly manage the money and assests already there instead of taking more? Just like increased rates on water to “build” new water system and all that, but never did anything with it and started taking that money seven years ago, so that’s easily millions if not tens of millions by now. Plus what happened with the other $10 m from the $30 m from the catastrophe of a road project on Chadbourne? Never heard anything from that or the company responsible for paying for damages to the bridge on Bell st, for he second time. The most obscure council, yet claim to be transparent.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkPost a comment to this article here: