COUNCIL AT ODDS ON SALES TAX; RICKARD, EGGIMANN OBJECT TO WATER IMPROVEMENTS APPROACH

Councilmen put Cape Girardeau's water manager through a rigorous question-and-answer session Monday to form their opinions on a water system sales tax.

Tom Taggart, utility manager for Alliance Water Resources, earlier this year predicted an impending water shortage for the city. Cape Girardeau's water system can process a total of 7.3 million gallons a day, and residents used 6.83 million gallons in one day last summer.

Burns & McDonnell, a Kansas City engineering firm contracted by the city, proposed 21 underground wells be drilled near the river. The engineers also believe Water Plant 1 should be expanded to treat the additional water made available through the wells.

The plan will cost $25 million, and Taggart recommended the council put a bond issue to finance improvements on the November ballot. If passed, a quarter-cent, 20-year sales tax would retire the debt.

Two councilmen, Jack Rickard and Richard Eggimann, weren't convinced that the Burns & McDonnell plan was the most economical. Eggimann said he would vote with the rest of the council despite his objections, but Rickard stayed opposed to the idea.

"I would like to see this thing done in a pay-as-you-go situation," he said. "I think doing this in a period of 20 years could give us a problem, and I want to see it done without a bond issue."

City Manager Michael Miller said the city's water situation won't allow water customers to pay as improvements are made. Commercial growth took its toll on the water supply, and now residents likely will have a shortage within the next two years.

If the bond issue was placed on the ballot and passed in November, it would take two years or more to complete the improvements. It will be cutting things close, Taggart said.

Rickard suggested digging three wells on the city's west side. It would save money and provide a quick solution, he said.

Taggart disagreed, saying keeping the wells in one area and treating the water at one plant would result in long-term savings.

Eggimann's objection to the Burns & McDonnell plan was that it will increase the water supply to only 10 million gallons per day. He wants to see more water produced for a $25 million expenditure. He also wants to see other options explored.

"I am really disappointed that you all determined what you were going to do before you investigated anything," Eggimann said. "I still think that having your mind made up before you do something is not the best way to move things forward."

Councilman Tom Neumeyer has been vocal in his support of the Burns & McDonnell proposal. The only other option, he said, would be doubling customers' water rates to pay for needed improvements.

The council is expected to vote on the issue at its Aug. 19 meeting. The deadline for getting the issue on the November ballot is Sept. 10.