WATER ISSUES

The easy part is done. The Cape Girardeau City Council has placed a bond issue and sales tax proposal on the Nov. 5 ballot.

Now for the real work: The city must educate the public as to why it needs $26.5 million in water system improvement bonds, and why a 20-year, quarter-cent sales tax is needed to finance the package.

The bond issue would fund expansion of the water plant near Cape Rock Park, drill 21 wells, expand treatment capacity at the other city water plant and improve the city's water distribution system. It is estimated the sales tax would generate $1.75 million annually for 20 years to retire the debt.

City officials should take heed of the successful transportation sales-tax campaign. The public was inundated with information and data. Dozens of public meetings were held. Questions were answered time and time again. Specific lists and priorities were forged. Needs were fully documented.

If people didn't understand the transportation sales tax proposal, it was their own fault. All the facts were easily accessible. Vision 2000 did an outstanding job leading the campaign.

Cape Girardeau residents will be asked to on two issues Nov. 5. If the bond issue passes but the sales tax doesn't, then water bills likely would rise 59 percent to pay for the improvements. That doesn't mean monthly city utility bills would go up that much. Those bills includes trash, sewer and water. Only the water charges would be affected.

If the sales tax is approved, all those who spend dollars in Cape Girardeau will help pay the costs. But it is the last sales tax the city can legally impose, until another expires. It would raise the total sales tax in the Cape of Girardeau to 6.475 cents.

Cape Girardeau's commercial expansion is outgrowing the city's water system. The existing system is estimated to reach maximum use within the next two years. Cape Girardeau residents have used up to 6.83 million gallons of water on high-demand days. That is inching precariously close to the city water capacity of 7.3 million of gallons a day.

It is important to note that a divided City Council came together to put this package on the ballot. Some councilmen originally questioned the high cost of repaying the bonds. As a result, an alternative plan was forged that would save $12.5 million on the payback of the bonds, making the final cost around $34 million. With that savings in place, the council voted unanimously to place the issues on the ballot.

The city should also address the matter of its 1992 purchase of the water system from Union Electric head-on. When residents overwhelmingly approved the purchase, most were convinced the current system was in good shape. A plant bought for $12 million just four years ago may now end up costing citizens $34 million to improve.

This bond issue represents a significant investment for voters. Now is the time to get informed. Now is the time for the city to launch an exhaustive informational campaign that brings the message to every voter's door.