The URL can be used to link to this page

02-24-17 CC Retreat Agenda CITY OF SHOREWOOD 24100 SMITHTOWN ROAD CITY COUNCIL RETREAT PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2017 EMERGENCY OPS. ROOM 12:00 P.M. Lunch available at 11:45 AM AGENDA CONVENE RETREAT Roll Call Mayor Zerby Johnson Labadie Siakel Sundberg Review Agenda 1. SOUTHSHORE CENTER A. City Administrator Memo B. Attachments a. Usage Graphs b. Revenues and Expenditures c. Rental Fee Sheet 2. STREET CIP/PASER EVAULATION A. City Administrator Memo B. Public Works Director Memo C. City Engineer Memo D. Attachments a. Pavement Rating and Record of Action Spreadsheet b. Street Maintenance schedule E. City Engineer Memo—Traffic Committee F. CIP Spreadsheet 3. ASSESSMENTS/FRANCHISE FEES A. City Administrator Memo re: Assessments B. Attachments a. Shorewood Assessment Policy Regarding Water Connections b. Outline of Shorewood Assessment Policy c. Finance Director Spreadsheet C. City Administrator Memo re: Franchise Fees D. Attachments a. League of MN Cities Information Memo b. Elk River Finds Its Way to Smoother Roads—Article in July/Aug 2016 MN Cities Magazine c. Xcel Energy Franchise Fee Printout CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA—FEBRUARY 9,2009 Page 2 of 2 4. ORGANIZED WASTE HAULING A. City Administrator Memo B. Attachments a. League of MN Cities Memo b. MN Pollution Control Agency Info Sheet c. Excerpt from MN PCA Report d. Memorandum of Understanding example from Arden Hills 5. RENEWABLE ENERGY A. City Engineer Memo B. Attachments a. Shorewood Renewable Energy Implementation Plan 6. ADJOURN ('11Y OF SH 0 . . d . . .., 5755 COIJKRY CLUB ROAD - SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 (952) 960-7900 FAX (9 52)474.0128 www,ci.shorPwood.mn.us citylrall @(,i,sl)oi,ewood.rrin.i.is February 17, 2017 Mayor Zerby and City Council members, This agenda contains a great deal of background information for the items that are going to be discussed next Friday. Giving this information to you in advance of the meeting, rather than verbally presenting it there, should make the retreat more productive by giving the council more time to discuss these important issues. We will have a brief Power Point or give a short background before each item that will lead into the discussion. The Southshore Center and street maintenance program are going to involve substantial cost. We are fortunate that there is approximately$700,000 in reserves above the city's fund balance policy that is available to assist with some of the expenses. It is important to note that there is a significant deficit in the street capital improvement fund by 2024 that will need to be addressed. r Lunch will be available starting at 11:45, and we will start the presentation right around noon. If you find that you have questions about a particular item, or need additional information, please contact me or the appropriate staff member prior to the meeting and we will get what you need. Sincerely, d eg erud City Administrator i �� PRINTED 014 RECYCLED PAPER #1A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Southshore Center Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud Reviewed by: Twila Grout Attachments: Facility Usage Graphs Revenues and Expenditures Background: Now that the Southshore Center is entirely owned by the City of Shorewood, the council needs to determine the direction the city will take with the facility. Included with this memo is historical usage numbers along with revenues and expenses for the facility. In 2016 there were an estimated 3,093 people who attended rental events at the SSC. This number does not include programs, kitchen rentals, or Southshore Senior Programming. This represents an increase of almost 20 percent since 2014. Financial or Budget Considerations: The SSC is subsidized by the city's general fund approximately $70,000 annually. Once the determination on how to proceed with the facility is made,the goals and targets for revenue and events need to be set at a level that is measurable and reasonable. Assuming the council wants to improve the facility and take steps to make it more marketable to bring in additional revenue,the council needs to consider hiring a consultant to assist with a facility evaluation as well as a market analysis. I do not think that analysis can be done internally. The strength of the staff relative to SSC is staffing and programming. Options: Among the questions to answer to give staff direction include: 1. What is your vision for the facility 2. Does the city make some initial improvements in the facility? 3. Do we hire a consultant to assist us with a facility and market evaluation?Or take some other course of action? 4. Should it be rebranded? If so, how does that process start,who is involved, etc.? Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel v E W 1-1 't m LID IV Gi 0 v s E m o o + O) H N -4 to W O Z U1 O H N -4 � 00 O N ..O E N ci V O V) N — A L H 3 ti Ln CO L Q .Q Q LL _ N— : Q ti -4 Lnn m m O c m �D Ln v0 m L G1 Q f0 ry � rn L O ++ MLL V a 1 m N Z3, 0) a a L 0 C i s N N Ln ONl 0 O OJ C �l m N V^1 O0, f6 O O O O O O O O O O O O O C'4 ri O O W h w Ln m N -1 Y adAl asesN Aq siasn;o aagwnN v N N E on a T v E W � E C n = O pp L N Y @ d Q ° " o v v a ~ a Y a N 0 vN m o m N w o u O .n N c�-I ° N w O > i O ' Z v MO t N .-i N ^ N n e O v m N � O d O Q N 00 N N O m -1 O n Q 7 ci N ci h .�-I Y cn tw Q L ci O M N LLn Cl V C1 i ° a m �ti L O t - - �n 0- N o m m H Q .- O MLL I N � t N w 7 ° O ° V Ln ° -0 li LL 7 O O m m m m C t0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O N H H O 0) 00 h l0 Ln a m N N G Y v adAl a2esn Aq s,iasn jo aagwnN c v E m D w tb O U 0 G C d H a - z w y 0 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ v a E m o h V T 41 .1 N Vt CO N C1 -E V N M N lr~i O > H O Z U) N 0 N E n v t N bbl W V) co oo ti o L Q) � A� C W v L s H o m j 0 L U N l0 N Ol � O ri N 1l1 00 10 2 V o m h m h w 1 � � m o m N m °° Y 'N UI °Q adAl aaesN Aq siasN jo jaquinN E � o w FQ- 2 Ll fl (l II I v 00 n Ln 0 n ai E N m m N N Ln O Z v - fl . �, N N N m m N .-i O o —�, E rn N Ln ONO LW o . a al Lo Y v1 co N O N �I Ln Q Q Wd - M L A�A, � W C N o o w N N V 7 N rl lD Ol W L t m m rn Ln I a m N y N U) m f11 r f R i o m n n 1 co Q li 0 m m o N ,n w 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 o oO D N v adA-L agesn Aq saran jo aagwnN ej w � c � m c v E D E K D w 6 N C v H O J a 'o 6 o Q o F'cu, a Y w c2 O ❑ ❑ ❑ Li L LI SUM MARY DATA All Program Usage by Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Total 2014 81 67 S9 94 S4 94 101 88 100 111 103 S9 1101 2015 81 S4 97 96 97 92 101 90 105 117 113 107 1180 2016 93 108 116 113 117 108 97 97 103 124 119 111 1306 1 ncrease from January 2014 to December 2016 = 18_6% Southshore Center 2014 2015 2016 Period Amt Period Amt Period Amt Revenues Charges for Services $ 38,093.75 $ 48,718.75 $ 46,305.24 Investment Revenue $ - $ 273.00 $ - Misc Revenues $ 41536.00 $ 552.00 $ 899.88 Total Revenues $ 42,629.75 $ 49,543.75 $ 47,205.12 Expenditures Personal Services $ 36,310.00 $ 371163.80 $ 35,816.50 Supplies $ 10,858.04 $ 221237.33 $ 13,018.60 Oil and Utility Charges $ 11,666.66 $ 10,281.06 $ 11,082.53 Professional Services $ 20,295.47 $ 16,622.36 $ 12,902.01 Other Services and Charges $ 51981.39 $ 23,875.86 $ 29,045.45 Total Expenditures $ 85,111.56 $ 110,180.41 $ 101,865.09 (Net Loss) $ (42,F481.81) $ (60,636.66) $ (54,659.97) Transfers In $ 85,756.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,001.00 Net Change in Fund Balance $ 43,274.19 $ 9,363.34 $ 15341.03 Fund Balance January 1 $ 469.00 $ 43,743.19 $ 53,106.53 Fund Balance December 31 $ 43,743.19 $ 53,106.53 $ 68,447.56 SouthShore Community Center Rental Rates January 15, 2010 20% Discount ( applies to room fee only): Banquet Room: Capacity 175 eo le at round tables, 200 people theatre style Regular Rates Resident Rates Day of Week Time of Day Hours Non-Resident (reflects 20% discount) Friday or Saturday Eve. 4:00 pm-12:00 midnight 8.0 $590 $472 Saturday Daytime per hr 9:00 am- 4:00 pm 7.0 $55/hr $44hr Saturday>4 hr daily block $328 $262 Sunday Daytime per hr 9:00 am-6:00 pm 9.0 $50/hr $40/hr Sunday>4 hr daily block $425 $340 Monday-Friday Day per hr 9:00 am—4:00 pm 7.0 $40/hr $32/hr Mon-Fri>4 hr daily block $275 $220 Mon-Thurs Eve.per hr 4:00 pm-12:00 midnight 8.0 $45/hr $36/hr Mon-Thurs>4 hr block $280 $224 Activity Room: Capacity 50-60 people depending on set-u style Resident Rates Day of Week Time of Day Hours Non-Resident (reflects 20% Rates discount Friday or Saturday Eve.per hr 4:00 pm-12:00 midnight 8.0 $42/hr $34/hr Friday or Saturday Eve. - $245 $196 >4 hr block Saturday Daytime per hr 9:00 am-4:00 pm 7.0 $35/hr $28/hr Saturday>4 hr daily block $160 $128 Sunday Daytime per hr 9:00 am-6:00 pm 9.0 $36/hr $28/hr Sunday>4 hr block $216 $173 Monday-Friday Day per hr 9:00 am—4:00 pm 7.0 $36/hr $28/hr Mon-Fri>4 hr daily block $160 $128 Mon-Thurs Eve.per hr 4:00 pm-12:00 midnight 8.0 $36hr $28/hr Mon-Thurs>4 hr block $150 $120 Conference Room: Capacity 25 people Resident Rates Day of Week Time of Day Hours Non-Resident (reflects 20% Rates discount) Daily Block>4 up to 7 hrs 9:00am—4:00 pm 7.0 $150 $120 Monday-Friday All hourly slots 2 hour $30/hr $24/hr min. All Rates: Based on a 2 (two) hour Minimum rental. Over>4 (four) hour rental subject to the daily block rate. Banquet room set up/tear down/custodial fee: $50.00/$200.00 (Depending upon event- Additional cleaning fees may apply) Activity Room and Library set up/tear down charge: $20.00 Kitchen Rental: • No additional charge if renting entire banquet room • $50 additional charge if renting Activity Room or Conference Room • $100 without room rental for the day or$25 per hour or ask for Commercial Kitchen Rates for food business' All Room and Kitchen rentals are subject to availability. Rate schedule subject to change. Rev.01/15/10 Page 1 Rentals Linen: • Round(21) @$6.00 ea. • Rectangle(12) @$6.00 ea. Dinnerware,Flatware,Glassware Available: • 200(4 pc)place settings- White Melamine(10" dinner plate,7" dessert/salad plates,cup/saucer) $2.00 per place setting or $0.45 per additional piece • 200(4 pc)place settings flatware-Dinner Knife,Dinner Fork,Salad Fork, Teaspoon) $1.50 per place setting or $0.35 per additional piece • 200 (1 pc.)settings-(water glass,wine glass)-Plastic $0.50 ea. Serve ware: • Bowls,platters,trays,salt/pepper @$1.00 per piece • Punch Bowl with Ladle(2 gal.)@$10.00 • Roaster @$12.00 Coffee Pots: • 36 cup @$10.00 • 55 cup @$15.00 • 100 cup @$20.00 • 32 oz.Thermos Carafe @$2.00 ea. • Bags of Decaf/Reg Coffee$5.00 ea. Audio/Visual Equipment: • VCR/TV @$15.00 • Overhead Projector @$20.00 • LCD Projector @$30/2 hours • Projection Screen @$15.00 • Easel @$10.00 ea. • Flipcharts(2 pak) @$35.00 • Set-Up AN system @$50.00(includes take-down) Miscellaneous: • Outdoor Sign(one-week)@$30.00 • Room Set-Up (includes tear-down) Activity Room and Library charge: $20.00 Banquet Room charge: $50.00 • SouthShore Police security is required to be hired if serving alcohol @$60.00/hour. • Overnight storage is not permitted. Meeting Room functions: Coffee,paper cups and napkins set-up available: • 12 cups @$8.00 • 36 cups @$25.00 • 55 cups @$30.00 • 100 cups @$65.00 Additional fees and/or damage deposits may be required for unique set-up or decorations. Rev.01/15/10 Page 2 #2A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: STREET CIP& BUDGET Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Paul Hornby, and Bruce DeJong Attachments: PASER flow chart, Street Maintenance Plan, Street CIP Budget Background: Public Works Director Brown explains the PASER pavement rating system that he uses to evaluate the condition of the city streets. City Engineer Hornby has two memos-one explains the condition of the roads that are scheduled for maintenance work in 2017, and the second one is the memo about the traffic committee's recommendations.The CIP spread sheet is the schedule and estimated cost for all roads to be repaired between 2017 and 2024.The goal of all of this information is to lay the ground work for how the City Council wants to move forward to close the funding gap for future street improvements. Financial or Budget Considerations: There is an anticipated shortfall of$2.3 million sortfall in the street CIP by 2024 if all projects are completed, and the work budgeted for is the actual work that is performed. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel ■ #213 MEETING TYPE: U92 1 City of Shorewood Council Staff Retreat Council—Staff Retreat Title/Subject: Pavement Management Inventory Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Paul Horn by,City Engineer Attachments: Pave mentRatings,HistoricaIActions The City of Shorewood owns and maintains 52.0 miles of asphalt pavement. The ownership, maintenance, and reconstruction of this infrastructure represents one of the most significant costs that a City incurs Having an accurate and effective pavement inventory system is critical to properly managing the investment of pavements. Each year, the Public Works Department performs a Pavement Management Inventory (PMI), utilizing what is known as the PASER - Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating System that was developed by Engineers atthe University of Wisconsin, Madison. This system of evaluation has been utilized by many agencies across the nation, to evaluate and manage pavement inventories. When addressing PMls,there are a vast array of programs that range from programs that require very intensive data collection, and often time costly processes,tothose that are simple to perform with minor processes and costs involved. There certainly are pros and cons associated with each methodology used. Many of these inventories involve having technicians count and measure each crack in the asphalt(for example), as a measure of stress and deterioration. This type of inventory is very laborious and costlyto perform. Other systems include a falling weightwhich measure the resulting deflections in the pavement and resultant vibrations through the strata of pavement and subgrade soils,to evaluate subsurface conditions. Staff is of the opinion that all of these methods lead to very similaranswers. Staff opted to draw upon the experience from the City of Hopkins, Minnesota Engineering Department. Hopkins had contracted to have a soils testing firm evaluate every roadway utilizing at dynamic hammer and sensors. The result was a very sophisticated (and expensive) model of exactlywhat was occurring with the structure of every roadway. Certainly, this was a very valuable tool. However, it was later discovered that the data obtained had a very limited shelf life, as each year the normal frost cycles of winter took their toll and changed the subgrade condition. To paraphrase the City Engineer at the time, "PMI programs, such as Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services,a healthy environment,a variety of attractive amenities,a sustainable tax base,and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 PASER, result in the same answer that that the sophisticated programs arrive at, and is a system that is easily understood by staff,City Councils, and the public. Very simply, under the PASER Method, each pavement is rated on condition from a rating of 1 to 10. While the method of evaluation is a detailed review, the cover of the process is a great summary of the result, as shown below: Pav2axrrt mare Evaivalfon and - A SP r r W-ormat on Cewer Univraiity of WiSMnrJrb-M2dlson Ultimately,the question becomes,how is this data used,once pavements have been rated? In response,the City of Shorewood has previously considered and approved what is known as the Pavement Reconstruction Decision Matrix,as shown below. PASER Rating No Good Yes Adequate Ho Yes Maintain Through Foundation Right of Rating>4 Seal Coat Soils? Way? &Oveday Yes No Existing No Edge Contra Yes No Edge Yes Control In No Consider Goad Sha e? Changes? Reclaim P Changes? Yes Reconstruct CITY OF SHOREWOOD DECISION FOWCHART FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION VERSUS PAVEMENT RECLAMATION Currently,the City of Shorewood has twelve roadways that are rated below a PMI rating of 4. The City has adopted a goal ofkeepingour pavements ataPMl index of4orgreater. Havingstated that, this really reflects notonlya maintenance goal, butultimatelya financial commitmenttothe future of the infrastructure. The charts below demonstrate various aspects of maintaining pavements in a routine performing minimal maintenance and fixingthe"worstfirst"approach,overtime. Chart 1 below depictsthe impacton the service lifefor pavements that are maintained regularlywith sealcoati ngand bituminous overlay,versus performing minimal maintenance. Pavement Lifec cle m axim.m numger of eppliaians allowed 10- lgafWat - ----------- Lkir------ CA-- - �- 7 0Oealeoe! -{ 2441400C ii4f�0iC ' - --- -------- - _.... ......... ....................... ;3 aaalcoal sealonai ............... _._. ............. .................... .._.._.._._.__._.._,._,._.._.._._.._._,._.._,._._. -- - ------------------1---------------------------------------------------- -- `---------- 2 ------•------------------- . -•---------•--- ....................... 1 Elvin-c Ma'-lvna�*U Gwy 0 20' 40 60 Start Age (Mears) of Pia n Chart 1 In addition to extendingoutthe service life of the pavement, by performingthe required sealcoating and overlays,the overall impacts of the costs are more effective,dollarfor dollar. PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX r: 52-00 PP M" �: CD 1= a Far 7596 01 111C $4.00 for RM Flare 2 oarKu w PM based on PC1 a 1: w WE 0061 SIZI)a FM 10 S16.00 for 11eCa61kiI�IWgY We N--:12%of WE 1 5 110 15 24 25 AGE OF PAVEMENT PP_P2vffr,-kV Prt*ad•vMM RM=Rilaanve 1 Wt+- Chart 2 Lastly,Chart 3 depicts the common remediesversus pavement conditions. STREET LIFE CYCLE NUMBER VERBAL CONDIRON RATING RATING GROUPING TYPICAL MAJNTENMCE NUMBER RREPAJR -cell 10 RATING COSTA.Y. ExC&Ilerrt Pevrfneeft C'lanw.0flku NoRepar 9 ro dsvr % Ig 40) Very Good i'rL),CW Street u Pay�n L Mud h�■ 7 -adOd s4x1MGan[krM d d st eeys_iron bad n Saa1yL4�t y (B-T) '•. SO-O ant wI of O"Vw. '. 5 load rdOW `. uj t St 4 F$i 4vefty > dabass 3 Poor 2 Very PW Prvamants Vial haw Recut/ucpan agn+ca,x amou na of mw ( 3) Failed d YEARS E 3 15 20 23 Chart 3 #2C MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: 2017 Mill and Overlay Improvements Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer Reviewed by: Background: On November 28, 2016, the Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the 2017 Mill &Overlay Improvement Project. Staff has started plan preparation and as part of the professional services, pavement cores (samples)were taken on each of the streets in the 2017 project: 1. Howards Point Road 2. Oak Ridge Circle 3. Kathleen Court 4. Echo Road 5. Summit Avenue Existing samples of the pavement are taken to determine the suitability of the pavement for milling, overlay and/or other treatments. There were 15 core samples taken on January 16, 2017, and pavement specialists analyzed the pavement and recommend that the pavement on the 2017 project roadways be reclaimed instead of the mill and overlay treatment. Reclamation of pavement consists of grinding up the existing pavement, mixing with the underlying aggregate base, re-grade the surface to restore crown (slope) and pave a new surface. Continuing with the mill and overlay of the roadways as planned may result in deterioration of the roadway pavement in a shorter timeline than should be expected and additional costs to maintain the roadways. Financial or Budget Considerations: The recommendation to reclaim the roadways does impact the budget for the 2017 project and the Finance Director has prepared a Street CIP modification to reflect needed budget for this work, enclosed with the Street CIP packet. Options: The following project options should be discussed by Council: 1. Adjust the CIP budget to reclaim the pavement for the 2017 project 2. Continue with the Mill and Overlay Project 3. Provide staff other direction Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends discussion of this item and Council direction for the 2017 street improvements. Staff does recommend that coring roadways to determine pavement suitability for these projects be performed two years in advance of the project to align the improvement with the CIP. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel I MEN( ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ m � ■ ■ IN om ■ �. ■ ■ � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ IN ■ ........... m� m��.... ..... ........ . ...-... a�m� ��momom��moo6� ------- -- m--------- ---- -------- -- ------0000�00000 -------- ---- --------- - 0.-------- ------ 0 0 0000 �0000 0 000 �oo �rmr�rrrr ------ ---------- -------- -------------- - r------ rrrr_r _ rr__ rr mm _ _rr rrr r -------- ------------------- 000----- 0000000000vomo 00000000000 mr_000 0 0 0000 00 00 0 000 ooe o mm --moor-------om_ _m_oommm moo__mr mmm -- - ----------- -mmomo 0 o mom-_ m Asa g d9 ....... - - =`s° vaaaddg.s ------e ----- 0 -- --moem�mo� 000�o_mo��o----------------- � 000�_oor000mo��0000�o �o�oo o�� o��00000-------------- �� rrrrrrrrrrrrr_r r r r r r r m rrrrrrrr rrrrrrmrrrrrrmr m rrrrr rrr_r rrr __rrr_r_r_mrrrr_mmmmmr r rrrrrr rr 000000_0000000000m_ m00000000 000000 00000moo 0000 ------------ ------------- - ----- 00 omm�o��mr�oo_revommomr�r�m _ om_mm_ o� 5gg _ H�ti m��<wwHHH��wH��>zz�>rcwe'��o�o�>womHO�HwwoHHi> ��08� >,.H >HH>HHHHH rcHHH�HHff�`imH z > ww�HH<�HH _ E�€ �° 8444 \` ■ ~\_ _ = m �� ■ \ , ■ _ � _ , } |_ _ _ � _ ■ � 2 / ■ � � � ■ ■ ■ � \ / ■ � ■ ■ _ ; ■ 2 �H ■ � ■ ■ � J : :::::: :::::::::: :: ; ::: :; \\\\ §'6E | ! \ QQG/QMAHIM-j/ h\ G { ! ~\\oUQeRQeQGdQ.eooQ = N G '— m m v v v v v v v r v co co u�co co co co v u�m m m u� co co co r co co r r r r co co v r co r r u� co co r r u�r co u� u�r u� N G '— v u�co co co v v v v r v co r r co r co r co u�u� co r co co co co m co co r co co co co co v r r r co u� co r m m r r v u� u�r u� N N � C G N r � G '— v co v r r co v v v u�co co r co r r r u�co co co co v r co co co m r r°r r r u�co v co r r r co co v u� m co r v co co v co N O � G '— v co v r r co v v v co co co co co co r r u�co co co r v co co co co m r co co r r r u�co v co r r r co co v u� m co r v co co v co N W � O � O — v co v r r co v v v co u� co co co co r r u�co u�co r v co co co co m r co co r co r u�co v r r r co co co v u� m co r u�co co v co N 00 O � O — m co v r r co m m v r co u�co co u�co r v co v co r v co co co co m r r u�r r r u�r m r m r r u� r v v m co r co u� u�v u� N O � O � O — mmv m m r mm vco co u�r mco co mvr vco rvco in in comr rinm mm vmm mm m rug rvv mrm rug invv N to O � O — vinm co v v vm u�u�co vu� rmm mco co vco vvv mug mmin vmm mco mu�v inm m com co u�v mmm vm mmu� N T o — a o a O m w° w° I O W° O O O W m U mo M, U W O; d C, W fn fn fn O O O D U W F U U U) U U U O > ¢] O U fn U U W U fn U U O fn O U O O ° o N'y a m N 0 O u O N m N C w v r N 2 O a a o o - °o 0 o 0 o � o o ° m o T 0 2 o a m o - o m a o o o o d d d d m o m s c — m ° _ n n 0 N _ -O 0 0 0 O C O N 2 N a O O 0 N —E —E 0 "O o U ° Uw U w n n z MD U > > > U U (7 � N > a a (p Z K a K c a K c a ?o c a A a°A a oA a`A a °t N m m a p c_ c t o o N 9 9° d d U U N A_ a o J K o U o o a J aaaaaa Hrc rc oO A rc 0 o o o rc N aO J o ` c U °o p w o c . c o o ° E oA A A o t> d d t a 0 ? a a s a g o E o d E O W W W W U' m m O V ° m U 2 2 U) U) U) V') U) C m m m m U U U U U U W U' U' U' O O a w K A N N N lfl � 0 '— c° rr r rrr rr rrr rm mrc° c°c°r rm rvr rc°c° vm c°mc° rug c°c°r c°mr c° m r mr c°rr ry rr N C 0 '— r rm r rrr c°r rrr rm rrc° mmrn rro rrr mc°r c°° c°°r rug r rr rmr c° m r rnr tort° c°v rr N N � C 0 '— m rnro r mmm yr rrr mm rc°r rr° rm c°rr °c°r c°° c°°r mc° rornro rorro u� m r °r rrc° c°m rr N r 0 '— m rorn r rrr u�r mrr rnrn rrr rr. rm rrr °c°r c°° c°u�r mc° rornro roror c° rn ro cor rvr ry rr N O � 0 '— r rnrn r rrr c°c° mrr rnrn rrco c°c°c° rm rc°c° u�rr inv c°inr mug rornro rroco c° rn ro mm tour ry rrn N W � O � O — r inrn r rrr mr rorro urn rmm mmm rro rmm u�rr u�v c°u�r mug rnrnro rrm m rn rn mm mu�r c°u� rrn N 00 C G '— r u�v r rrr c°r rrm urn rmm mmu� rrn c°c°c° u�c°r u�u� u�u�r mug rnrnro rrr u� rn ro mr rvr c°v m° N O � C 0 '— r vv r rrr yr rrm u�v rrr rru� rorn rco co u�rr c°c° u�c°r rug °Om mmm u� rn ro rr rmr c°v °r N to O � O — c° mc° r rrr yr mrm u�v mmm mmv rm mc°c° u�c°m ry u�vm mr c°mm rmr v rn ro roro mcoro rm c°m N Z in > a N 0 L _ o W mo 0 D W W a _ U W m N O > O O m O W ` W O E � a W N D a a a 0 0 0 m 'o 15, E m> U 0 'i� 0 U) ° C) C) > F�w mzC = > ) m ) ) ) o � c) c) (72 w o m o U) w U U U U C, wUOOOU w` xin c� c� c� c� zc� ink rn c I a a = a W o o o >>> O 0 m N ° ° m m N O W O d m y o U --m>o ai -- m> 0 0 m O o O a 0F O W m 0 O m 0 0 cm' W W 3 W � O O O a � � n n n O W O O = N E E O N o ai 55 t 10 W J 0 0 y nmmmm �xoxUnU) oz ° C) U) � � U wLL � � m wr� � r� o � GW > o � � � U) rn .5 v A a s a s D A A A a d W C d N Z_N it oc i m`.,m a_ mO`I mO`I mO`I mO`I U d Nd =a a a = =�' H 5 I A E A E A E c m o a'- a5 ` ` d a A a a c •• d @ A c J c a °O' c> ry� °>A'..d m_ J c c a C N�c N�c m rc m rT c q rc> > c c o N > m N mU m m U 0 U ° ° o°= 0 o o o O o U J c 0 0 r U o A m A Vi m A C 9 > o ° ° d A c a t y a 'c E " Q Q v = ' ° )m mmm wo V)) VT c rq G '— r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m rn rn rn rn N G '— r r r r co r r co r r r v r r r m r m rn m m m m rn rn m m m m m r r rn r m m rn rn m m m m m m m co r rn m rn rn m rn N C G '— r r r r r rn r co r r r v r r rn rn r rn rn rn m° rn°rn m m m m m r r° r ro o 0 o rn ro ro ro ro ro ro rn r rn o rn rn rn rn N N � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r u�mm m� coror rr u� cor �mco °�� ro roro ro rnro rco� corms �co �mm mmm rnrn m�� rn� rn rn N � r 0 '— r in cor co u� rmr rr u� rr °mr u�v ° my °corn mm m mm rr° rr° °co °mm mmm rnrn r°v rn° rn rn N O � C mm m mm rr 0 '— co u�cor co u� rrr rr v rco vrnr u�u� ° my u�corn ° rru� in in °mm mmm rorn rmv rn° rn rn N W � G '— (O LL�(O(O r LL� r r r r r v I�co v rn(O (O(O (O rn v LL�co rn ro ro ro ro ro r co M I�W LL� LL�LL� N of of of of of of rn (O M v rn° rn rn N 00 C G '— V(O(O (O LL� r r r r r V I�co M rn co co co co rn LL� LL�co° W r r rn W W co M (O I�LL� LL�co N of of of of of of rn co M LL� rn° rn rn N O � C 0 '— vrr cov rcor mm v mco vrnr rug co °u� inr° rorn rn rnrn °rom rmu� inr vmm mmm rn° rmr u�° rn rn N to C 0 '— in mco co u�co rmm mm m mm m°m mm co rnm u�vro rnrn rn roro rorov rornv vm u�oo 000 or co cov r° v m N 2 O 0 ^ m m L o 2 c U ° o > o U U p �' u m a 00 m C p m m U o ° = o p p E E U =E - O N 2 O O p T N O "O 0 d d d .'> V d d N U d d d d U U U > 7 ° w i w o a C a L w" w" a a b > w° ii -O "d0 FF ` '°�O m L m L U m wU a w m ) C f6 Im �'>p'• O -0 "m 0 � a m m a m m T—d c m m 0 d d a m c = = 0 o 0 0 c m 0c mo Zm 0 a 0 m m ' o° ° o o -o 0 -0 o o m 0 0 0 a o 0 m T o o � oo 7 m D . = m 0 d m o`o ° Y Z o , a � � o LLO 0 o 2 o U) C) o z n c) z n U) w Um C) w mU) C) m c7xmUM U 7ww U) c 3 c 0 d• N o .. 5 c ' o O O _ m Z U U G = O O .c OC d d A A d J C a O N a O N a O N a O N a O o C O U d d p K K K K K N 5 O N O_ L U U a a L O o ° a 2 a a a U o o 0 0 o o Y 0 a d v K c o a cn ' A ° d Q i Y00000000000000000000000000000 N � lfl � 0 rn rnrrn �rnrn rrn rnrn� rnrn rn�rn rnm� ��r �m c°r� �c°c° �r� 'n� N � 0 rn rnr� �rn� u�� rnrn� rnrn rn�rn rnmZ rco c°�c° �v vr� ��u� rr rrr rr� 'n� N Z � N � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G rn r v rn u�u� rn v rn r .. .. N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G ro ry rn mm u� rn u� c° u�c° tout° ry u�c° - -r rrr rrc° rm mmv v N O � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ... .. ... ... . G ro rug rn rm u� rn vu� c° c°u� vvr ry m mmv v N W � N 00 C N } Q O C Q cl N o o m o o r o o o r r m m v r r v v ro u� M M v r r r r r u�ro r co M M v M M Q to W W W W O W po m m m r m m m m m m v m m v v v v v v» » 6 Of N K K K K 0 0 a a a a Z Q -o ° d a O u'� 3 a c dinz m T W W d W m W �_ T d d W W co — — — — — — — — c� c� c� c� 3c) c) mO000U � U w' U ¢ c7c� c30 � 000 = 000o0000m0 000wc30 � 0 C O 2 d E > 10 10= m n n m n F -= o o o O n a m o d J>m a Y' O a O o o � o 0 ° ° w y m ° > U o° 10 _ Q 0o a s n v >0 z z 7 n z° wn U s rn r 0 d N A a = mJ q ; C-4 Z : :: q ; mJ q ; mJ Of -4 » » \ \ \ \ ) ) C : § » : \\ \ r §rrrr �rO:: :: :\ E ()) �� ) / � :e leeeee) � � §22 // 2 \ \ /~ (\jjjj \j \jjjjj\ f ° f \ : ) £ § 0 : � k { \?55 0 $ 0 � ( : : ! \ = 5 / a5 : : � _ z 0 2 « | E b ;!! !� ) )i ®\ , t;. ;; ). =0| l | § Ewk ) !!) Q | � r 2 (: ffa2 ! § «72 : lww # «\!#■��]� !°%a[ #2E MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Retreat .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Country Club Road,Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Road Discussion Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Paul Hornby Reviewed by: Attachments: Traffic Memorandum, Concept layouts Policy Consideration: Should the City begin planning of improvements recommended by the Traffic Committee, or other improvements to Country Club Road,Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Drive? Background:The City Council discussed the Traffic Committee supported improvements for the Country Club Road,Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Drive corridor at the July 11, 2016 work session and the September 12, 2016 Council meeting. Council consensus at the last meeting directed staff to provide a shorter list of potential improvements with a brief statement of the feasibility, estimated costs and time effort to implement. Staff has reviewed the list of improvements identified in the corridor from the September 12th meeting and have provided a short summary of the improvement, estimated range of potential costs, advantages and disadvantages that are associated with feasibility of the improvement. The estimated time to implement each project is variable and will depend upon capital funding. Lower cost items such as driver awareness/feedback signage, pavement markings, are lower cost improvements that can be implemented short term (2017-2018). The summary of items below provide an estimated time of implementation. Smithtown Road at Country Club Road— ■ Dual Roundabout(CSAH 19)-2 to 4 years due to land acquisition and coordination with the County • Signalized Intersection—1 to 2 years due to coordination with the County Smithtown Road— ■ Widen Roadway from Wooden Cleek Drive to Country Club Road- 1 to 2 years to plan, design and construct Country Club Road— ■ Widen roadway approaching Smithtown Road—1 to 2 years to plan, design and construct • Widen roadway with bike lanes—2 to 3 years to plan, design, acquire land/easements and construct Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 Yellowstone Trail— ■ Stop sign Enhancements—3 to 6 months to order install signs • Improve sight lines- 0 to 6 months—Could utilize Arborist or City staff for tree trimming City staff for signage • Intersection Improvements-6 months—implement with pavement marking in 2017 • Realign intersection at Seamans Drive- 6 months to 18 months to plan design, quote improvements Lake Linden Drive— ■ Access Improvements—Cub/Mall Exit- 6 months to plan, design and 6 months to one year to coordinate with owner • Roadway Improvement—Widening at TH 7- Ito 2 years due to coordination with MnDOT Cub/Mall • Roadway Realignment—Westbound access—2 to 4 years to plan and coordinate with additional access to MnDOT right of way, potential land acquisition Miscellaneous Improvements— ■ Technology Improvements—Google Maps- 6 to 8 months (staff time) • Enforcement- Staff time (immediate) • Traffic Calming—Driver Feedback signs-3 to 6 months to order install signs Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff requests the Council engage in discussion about the Summarized improvements and provide staff direction on actions for theses roadways. Infrastructure■ Engineering■ Planning■Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South 1,"Iyvt Yah'a.hN Suite#300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum To: Larry Brown, P.E., Public Works Director Paul Hornby, P.E., City Engineer City of Shorewood From: Chuck Rickart, P.E., P.T.O.E. Transportation Engineer WSB &Associates,Inc. Date: January 17, 2017 Re: Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood,MN WSB Project No.: 2925-140 The Shorewood Traffic Committee presented a report to the City Council on July 11, 2016. The Mayor and City Council requested that information be provide so that they have a basis for discussion of potential improvements for the traffic corridors of Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Drive. The City Council ask that a summary of the potential feasible improvements (i.e. moderate to low cost and easily implementable) from the Concept/Idea list provided by the Traffic Committee. The summary outlined below includes the scope of each item,potential cost range and the advantages and disadvantages by roadway segments. Smithtown Road at County Club Road Dual Roundabout(Country Club Road and CSAH 19) - Includes reconstruction of both CSAH 19 and County Club Rd with two interconnected roundabouts. This improvement would involve significant design, right of way impacts and coordination with Hennepin County. Estimated Cost Range - $2,000,000 to $2,500,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Improves traffic efficiency • Discourages cut-through traffic Disadvantages: • Does not restrict cut-through traffic • High cost • Requires property acquisition • Roundabout configuration requires public education Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 2 Signalized intersection coordinated with CSAH 19 - Includes a traffic signal at the intersection of Smithtown Road and Country Club Road with additional lanes on Country Club Road and Smithtown Road. Signal coordination with CSAH 19 intersection would require review and approvals with Hennepin County. Estimated Cost Range - $1,250,000 to $1,750,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Improves traffic efficiency • Reduces traffic congestion Disadvantages: • Does not limit cut-through traffic • High cost • Requires property acquisition Smithtown Road Widen roadway from Mattamy Entrance to Country Club Road- Includes addition of a left turn lane, a through/right turn lane and a separated bike/pedestrian path without addition of any traffic control at Country Club Road. Estimated Cost Range - $350,000 to $500,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Improves traffic efficiency • Reduces traffic congestion Disadvantages: • Does not limit cut-through traffic • Moderate cost Country Club Road Widen roadway approaching Smithtown Rd- Includes addition of a left turn lane and right turn lane without addition of any traffic control at Country Club Rd. Estimated Cost Range - $200,000 to $300,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Improves traffic efficiency • Reduces traffic congestion Disadvantages: • Does not limit cut-through traffic • Moderate cost Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 3 Widen add bike lanes with 25 mph Speed Limit- Includes widening Country Club Road to provide a through lane in each direction with a minimum 6 foot on road bike lanes with a 25 mph speed limit. Estimated Cost Range - $1,250,000 to $1,750,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Possible reduction in speed • Discourages cut-through traffic Disadvantages: • High cost • Requires property acquisition • Requires more enforcement Yellowstone Trail— County Club Rd to Lake Linden Drive Stop Sign Enhancements - Change existing stop signs to Blinker Stop signs at County Club Road and Lake Linden Drive intersections Estimated Cost Range - $5,000 to $7,500 Advantages: • Improves safety • Daytime visibility • Low cost Disadvantages: • Nighttime visibility for neighbors • Needs a power source Improve Sight Lines - Cut back trees along corridor especially at intersections Estimated Cost Range— Staff time Advantages: • Improves safety • Low cost Disadvantages: • Does not restrict cut-through traffic Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 4 Intersection Improvements - At the Lake Linden Drive intersection add a street light, a pedestrian crosswalk, and pedestrian crossing signs. Estimated Cost Range - $1,500 to $2,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Low cost Disadvantages: • Does not restrict cut-through traffic Yellowstone Trail—West of Lake Linden Drive Improve Sight Lines - Trim trees and add additional curve signing at Seamans Drive (delineate curve). Estimated Cost Range— Staff time+ $400 to $500 Advantages: • Improves safety • Low cost Disadvantages: • Does not restrict cut-through traffic Improve Sight Lines - Realign Yellowstone Trial at Seamans Drive to a 90 degree intersection with Blinker Stop signs. Estimated Cost Range— $20,000 to $30,000 Advantages: • Improves safety • Daytime visibility Disadvantages: • Moderate cost • Requires property acquisition • Nighttime visibility for neighbors • Needs a power source Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 5 Lake Linden Drive Improve Sight Lines - Fix grade changes north of Cub development access for left turning vehicles Estimated Cost Range - $30,000 to $50,000 Advantages: • Improves safety Disadvantages: • Possible property acquisition • Moderate cost • May encourage cut-through traffic Lake Linden Drive at Cub Entrance/TH 7/TH 41 Access Improvements - Close Cub development exit from the east at frontage road (Lake Linden Drive) maintaining inbound movement. Estimated Cost Range - $5,000 to $10,000 Advantages: • Improves traffic efficiency Disadvantages: • Development circulation • Moderate cost • May encourage cut-through traffic Roadway Improvement-Widen Lake Linden Drive eastbound to two approaching lanes (one right turn/through to westbound TH 7 and to TH 41 and one left turn to eastbound TH 7) and one exiting lane westbound. Estimated Cost Range - $500,000 to $750,000 Advantages: • Improves traffic efficiency Disadvantages: • High cost • Requires property acquisition • May encourage cut-through traffic Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 6 Roadway Realignment-Move the westbound right turn lane from the intersection at TH 41 to a free right with acceleration lane at approximately the existing Lake Linden Drive extended. (Movement would be removed from the TH 7/TH 41 intersection) Estimated Cost Range - $500,000 to $750,000 Advantages: • Improves traffic efficiency Disadvantages: • High cost • Requires property acquisition • May encourage cut-through traffic • Requires MnDOT review and approval Miscellaneous Technology Improvements - Remove use of Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive from Google Maps directions. Estimated Cost Range— Staff time Advantages: • Discourages cut-through traffic • Low cost Disadvantages: • Process in removing roadways Enforcement- Improve/Enhance enforcement of speeding and traffic control on area roadways. Estimated Cost Range— Staff time Advantages: • Improves safety • Improves traffic efficiency • Low cost • Discourages cut-through traffic Disadvantages: • Limited availability of Police Traffic Committee Summary City of Shorewood, MN January 17, 2017 Page 7 Traffic Calming- Add Driver Feedback speed control signs at selected locations on Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive Estimated Cost Range - $5,000 to $7,500 each Advantages: • Improves safety • Reduces speed • Low cost Disadvantages: • Does not reduce cut-through traffic Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this memo,please do not hesitate to contact me at 763-287-7183 a ' 1 Of i 6F AL w }- f is w a ■ • t _ r _ P d how 9 7 i y r ,i t $ ` r r ■ • .4 'f FFF F . F t * r-` - a r _'list. op � R City of Shorewood, Minnesota Capital Improvement Program 0 Overlay 2017 thru 2021 Reconstruction M reclaiM PROJECTS BY FUNDING SOURCE Pavement Priorit Original Modified Project# Rating y 2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total 404-Street Reconstruction Fund Echo Road LR-17-01 4 0 71,000 M 172,000 172,000 Howards Point Road LR-17-02 5 0 180,000 M 480,000 480,000 Kathleen Court LR-17-03 7 0 22,000 M 39,000 39,000 Oak Ridge Circle LR-17-04 7 0 29,000 M 67,000 67,000 Summit Avenue LR-15-06 6 0 32,000 M 50,000 50,000 Riviera Lane LR-17-05 6 R 371,000 371,000 371,000 Shorewood Lane LR-17-06 5 R 455,000 455,000 455,000 2017 Original Subtotal 1,160,000 1,634,000 Enchanted Cove LR-24-02 4 M 24,000 M 24,000 24,000 Enchanted Drive LR-24-03 4 0 72,000 M 142,000 142,000 Enchanted Lane LR-24-04 4 0 127,000 M 257,000 257,000 Dellwood Lane LR-24-01 4 0 42,000 M 55,000 55,000 Shady Island Circle, Point& Road LR-23-01 5 0 116,000 M 234,000 234,000 Shady Island Trail LR-23-02 5 R 128,000 M 73,000 73,000 Island Roads Subtotal 509,000 785,000 Maple Street LR-18-02 4 0 100,000 100,000 Mann Lane LR-18-01 5 R 444,000 444,000 Strawberry Lane&W 62nd LR-19-06 7 R 11140,000 11140,000 Christmas Lane W LR-19-03 7 0 32,000 32,000 Vine Street LR-19-07 7 0 33,000 33,000 Lilac Lane LR-19-05 7 0 46,000 46,000 Boulder Circle LR-19-02 7 0 49,000 49,000 Bayswater Road LR-19-01 5 0 100,000 100,000 Eureka Road N LR-19-08 6 0 260,000 260,000 Excelsior Blvd LR-20-02 7 0 191000 19,000 West Lane LR-20-04 7 0 32,000 32,000 Birch Bluff Road LR-20-01 6 0 107,000 107,000 Seamans Drive LR-20-03 6 R 629,000 629,000 Christmas Lake Road LR-21-02 7 0 107,000 107,000 Christmas Lane E LR-21-01 7 0 21,000 21,000 Country Club Road LR-21-03 5 0 95,000 95,000 Glen Road East LR-16-07 6 R lIU241UUU 11024,000 Amlee Road (Deferred) LR-16-01 4 R 332,000 332,000 Manitou Lane (Deferred) LR-16-04 4 R 317,000 317,000 Chestnut Court&Chestnut Terrace LR-22-01 8 0 58,000 58,000 Murray St LR-22-02 7 0 82,000 82,000 Rampart Court LR-22-03 7 0 24,000 24,000 Silver Lake Trail LR-22-04 7 0 47,000 47,000 Smithtown Circle LR-22-05 7 0 25,000 25,000 Sylvan Lane LR-23-03 7 0 28,000 28,000 Wild Rose Lane E&W LR-23-04 6 R 842,000 842,000 Street Sign Replacement LR-99-001 71500 71500 71800 81100 81400 81700 91000 91300 91600 68,400 Maintenance-Bituminous Sealcoating LR-99-100 184,000 184,000 238,000 305,000 274,000 255,000 248,000 275,000 323,000 21102,000 404-Street Reconstruction Fund 1,860,500 2,610,500 1,929,800 833,100 1,069,400 2,159,700 493,000 1,154,300 332,600 10,582,400 Potential cost increase due to reclaiM 750,000 #3A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Retreat .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Shorewood Assessment Policy Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud Reviewed by: Attachments: Policy regarding water extension assessments, Outline of assessment policy Background: The city does not have a comprehensive special assessment policy, and special assessments are probably one of the least liked policy decisions a city has to make. There is a wide range of options regarding the use of assessments-some cities have a long history of using special assessment for public improvements, some use them only at a minimal level as required by statute if bonding for a project, and other cities chose to use special assessment in very limited circumstances or not at all. There are pros and cons to all of the approaches, and it really comes down to what the council wants to do. The outline of assessment policy attached to this memo lays out most of the factors a council will consider as they adopt a policy. In addition, I refer you to the League of MN Cities website and their special assessment tool kit—it is an outstanding resource: http://www.Imc.org/media/document/1/sagtext.pdf?inline=true Financial or Budget Considerations: All of the options carry varying costs. Options: I think the council needs to approve a policy. Regardless of what the city council chooses to assess for and not assess for, it is important that whatever is decided be memorialized in a written policy. For the meeting: 1. Review and revise, if necessary,the policy regarding assessments for extending water. 2. Decide if there should be an assessment for initial street construction (i.e., initial paving, storm water, etc.) Once staff has direction on what the council wants to see in a comprehensive policy,we can work to bring something back to you by mid-year. As you will hear during the retreat there is a gap between the cost to maintain road and the amount that is available using present resources. Future sources of revenue will need to be identified in order to adequately maintain the city's infrastructure, and assessments can be one of those tools. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 r MEMORANDUM TO: City Council I FROM: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator C Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Bonnie Burton, Director of Finance Brad Nielsen, Director of Planning DATE: April 6, 2006 SUBJECT: Discussion of Policies regarding Extension of City Water for April 10, 2006, City Council Work Session At its March 13 work session,the Council had a wide-ranging discussion about provisions in the I current City ordinance to extend City water and for property owners to connect to City water. The Council wished to look at alternatives to the City's use of a connection charge(currently$10,000) for the owner of a property to access City water. Re-statement of City Policy: To summarize what Council reviewed at the March 13 work session, a City water project process can be initiated by 1) 100%petition—from owners of all affected properties. 2) 35%petition—from property owners whose frontage is> 35% of the abutting streets. 3) 67%petition—from owners of at least 67 percent of the lots or parcels abutting the streets. C 4) City-initiated project. In Cases 1-3,the property owners would have special assessments. In Case 4,there may or may not be special assessments. The "67% petition" is a classification Shorewood has created for itself; it is not mentioned in State law regarding improvements or special assessments. Shorewood has used this 67%threshold to initiate a feasibility study to extend City water. According to MSA 429.031, i • If there is at least a 35%petition (i.e., cases 1, 2, and 3), the Council may begin the process upon approval by at least four-fifths of the Council. • The City may initiate the process, whether assessments would result or not, with approval by a simple majority of the Council. City Water Policy–Extension and Connection April 10, 2006, City Council Work Session Page 2 • If a project subsequently is ordered with special assessments by the Council, approval by at least four-fifths of the Council is required. • If there are no special assessments, the improvement may be ordered by a simple majority of the Council. i FINANCING i i i The City has a connection charge (currently $10,000) for property owners to access the City's water system. When a property owner connects to the City system, he/she pays the connection charge less any special assessment that may have been paid. i i For example, using the current$10,000 connection charge: 1) If a property has been assessed $7,500 for water improvements, the owner would pay$2,500 to connect to the City's system ($10,000 minus $7,500= $2,500). 2) If a property has not been assessed anything for water, the property owner pays the full $10,000 to connect to the City's system. 3) If a property had been assessed any amount over$10,000 for water improvements,the owner would pay nothing additional to connect to the City's water system. • The owner would still need to pay for a water line to be placed from his/her building to the stub for the City's water in the right-of-way. i The connection charge is intended to recover costs associated with the water system beyond the watermain placed under the street. These components include wells, wellhouse structures, treatment systems and controls, water towers,trunk watermains, etc., that are part of the overall City water system. Cities commonly use a uniform connection charge toward these costs. i i Council raised concerns about equity in its discussion of this policy. The costs of special assessments I may vary, and it was thought appropriate for owners to pay the benefit (i.e., the increase in the value) to their properties. Several councilmembers believed that all property owners should pay the same to the overall water system beyond the assessment. They had questions about equity, in that this cost may vary due to differences between the connection charge and the assessment. In the examples above, (1)pays $2,500; (2) pays $10,000; and (3)pays nothing toward the City system. i Limitations on Special Assessments: As a point of law in Minnesota, a special assessment levied shall not exceed the benefit—the increase in the value—to a property. In cases where costs exceed what can be assessed, those costs would be borne by the Water Fund (e.g., using accumulated connection charges from other projects, or including them in water rates), or the Council may determine the project not to be feasible and forgo it. If all property owners in a project wanted City water even though the costs exceeded what could be assessed, they could all agree to the higher amount—and not to challenge the assessment—and the project could proceed. City Water Policy—Extension and Connection April 10, 2006, City Council Work Session Page 3 Preliminary Information regarding Value of Benefit: Staff has contacted several property appraisers to get a reading on the dollar value of benefit to properties having City water available. None was willing or able to provide a general range of value that would be typical for properties having City water available, and none would hazard an amount for Shorewood. A more detailed analysis and statement of determination can be engaged if Council so chooses. I Uniform Connection Charges: Staff has reviewed a survey of several area communities of varying sizes that have uniform connection charges separate from the cost of installing watermains. These charges range from $1,600 in Wayzata to $5,000 in Chanhassen and Victoria. It is possible,though difficult, to establish the cost of Shorewood's system improvements and convert ! them into present dollars, and determine how much of those costs in present dollars have been I collected over the years in connection fees. There will also be costs for future capital improvements to the system. It would appear reasonable that if a uniform connection charge (in addition to a special assessment) were established, that it be an amount comparable to other cities'. The City currently has 1,265 water customers (including ones in Deephaven). There are approximately 227 potential customers who have water in their streets,but have not connected to the City system. Approximately 93 units could be served if water is extended to their areas in j conjunction with the street reconstruction schedule in the current CIP. Assuming a uniform connection charge of$3,000, approximately $960,000 could be received. i i Equity Issues, Retrospectively: Council discussion at the March 13 work session explored assessing for water improvements and establishing a uniform connection charge,with some comments that this approach may have greater equity than the City's current policy. Staff has identified several cases where equity issues could arise by changing the policy: I a) There are several instances where City watermains have been installed by a private developer (with the costs then passed on to residents who purchased the lots), and owners of property along the line did not contribute to its construction. I ■ From the Shorewood Village Shopping Center to the Minnetonka Drive/County Road 19 intersection. The shopping center owner and the new Linden Hills subdivision paid.for the cost of the installation in 2003; the residents along Minnetonka Drive did not. ■ From Boulder Bridge to Shorewood Oaks. The developer(actually, the lots in Shorewood Oaks)paid the full cost. Very few of the properties in the j intervening 3,000 feet contributed to the cost of installation at the time (mid- 1980s), although there have been several connections since. • Along the southerly portion of Eureka Road, in conjunction with development of Shorewood Pond (2000-01). • Along Excelsior Boulevard, in conjunction with the Barrington development (2004). • Part of the Woodhaven area, in conjunction with development by JMS Development Company. E C L City Water Policy–Extension and Connection April 10, 2006, City Council Work Session Page 4 In these situations, property owners would currently pay the full connection charge ($10,000), which would go toward the City system. In the policy change under consideration, they would pay only the uniform connection charge, and thus pay far less than other properties that have connected to City water. I b) The connection of the Amesbury and Southeast Area water systems is ready to go immediately. Thus far and within current City policy, the project is considered to be an improvement to the City system and not to be assessed. Today, property owners would pay the full connection charge at time of hook-up. For this project,the same issues would arise as in (a) above with the policy change under consideration. If the project were to proceed immediately, there would be no assessments. Unlike the examples in (a) above, ratepayers—not new development— would pick up the full cost. The adjoining property owners would then pay the uniform connection charge in effect at the time of hook-up. The watermain for the interconnection will have a bigger pipe and greater scope of construction than would be typical to serve residential properties. In these situations, it is a common practice to determine costs attributable to the "oversizing" and have them assumed by the Water Utility. The rest is subject to assessment. ? If Council were to change the policy and follow a 429 improvement process for potential assessments with this project, it could not order the improvement and award a contract for the work prior to holding a public hearing. The developer of the Parkview subdivision has installed watermain in the subdivision under the premise that the City would extend City water this year. c) Some properties have been assessed for City water, but have not vet connected and paid the remainder of the charge. Assessments of$5,000 have been levied for most properties along Smithtown Road, Eureka Road north of Smithtown Road, and along the western end of Edgewood Road. If a uniform connection charge in any amount less than $5,000 were established, these properties would not pay the full $10,000 currently in effect. Statutory Authority for Current City Policy: The basis for the City's current connection charge policy is allowed in MSA. 444.075, Subd. 3.(a). The City may establish"just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability of the facilities and the connection with them, ..." Based upon analysis done several years ago, the$10,000 connection charge was determined to meet the "just and equitable"test. It would be appropriate to review this amount periodically. Policy Considerations of Current Policy and Policy under Consideration: The City's approach for extension of and connection to City water is unique in that it is followed within a great deal of existing development, and is generally incremental and based largely on voluntary connection. Within the current policy, City Water Policy–Extension and Connection April 10,2006, City Council Work Session Page 5 • The connection charge is the same. • The connection charge is generally predictable, and property owners can plan accordingly. • The connection charge meets statutory requirements. • The connection charge provides a benchmark for economic feasibility. • The policy of giving credit for any assessments paid against the connection charge has administrative difficulties (but is not insurmountable). • The connection charge results in variable amounts paid by individual property owners to the larger City system. I I With the policy under consideration, • Each property pays the same uniform connection charge for the larger City system. • There is administrative ease in having separate assessment and connection charges. • Total costs per property are variable—project assessment plus uniform connection charge. • Total costs per property may be more or less than the City's current connection charge. • There is no consistent amount to use as a benchmark for determining when a development is required to connect to City water. • Total costs resulting in less than City's historic connection charges may not be"equitable". I POLICY ON EXTENSION ' i Required Extension: Section 903.15 of the City Code addresses cases where hook-up to the City water system is mandatory. They include properties used for commercial purposes and multiple- family residential purposes (4 or more dwelling units). Single-family residential developments of j more than three lots must also connect to the municipal system, at the developer's expense, based upon the City Engineer's determination that the connection is feasible. This Code section specifically states that"[t]he connection is considered feasible if the cost of the providing water to the property line of the lots within the development does not exceed the connection charges ... times the number of lots in the development." Voluntary Extension: Section 903.04, Subd. 3.d., provides that"[f]or properties not presently served by municipal water service, developers or property owners who wish to extend water service to their property line, shall pay for the cost of the improvement or the water connection charge, whichever is greater." Petition Process: The City Council has practiced a policy that it does not initiate the improvement process unless a petition from at least 67% of the affected property owners is submitted. In Conjunction with Other Projects: During its 2005 discussions on the water system, Council articulated a policy that the City would perform a feasibility study when other improvements, especially roadway reconstruction, were undertaken. i City Water Policy–Extension and Connection April 10, 2006, City Council Work Session Page 6 The water project would then be a City-initiated one. The Council should discuss whether it would proceed with installation of water (assuming it's feasible): • when, after presenting the information to the affected property owners, 67% of them indicate approval (by petition or other means), or • as a City improvement, possibly with special assessments, and without petition of the affected property owners, or • under some other basis. i New Connection Charge Policy? Several projects are ready to go this year—notably the interconnection of the Amesbury and Southeast Area s}istems, and the street reconstruction of the Wedgewood/Mallard/Teal neighborhood streets. Delay on any project will very likely result in higher costs as contractors' schedules are filled this year or as inflation occurs into next year. The Council could consider a change in the connection charge policy whereby, a) The current connection charge remains in place for the balance of 2006. All properties j adjacent to City water as of December 31, 2006,that have not connected to the City water j system, shall pay the current ($10,000) connection charge when they do connect. j b) All properties to which water is extended beginning January 1, 2007, shall be assessed for the benefit to their properties (unless all affected owners of property in a project area agree to pay more). The new uniform connection charge shall be paid at the time that the property is connected to City water. WEDGEWOOD/MALLARD/TEAL AREA I Council has stated its expectation that residents in this improvement project area will be provided complete and fully accurate information regarding the process to consider extending City water to this neighborhood, the costs related to the City system they can expect to incur, and the duration and terms available for financing them. Staff will follow up with this information promptly after Council has determined what, if any, changes will be made to the current policy. I i I i I i E OUTLINE OF SHOREWOOD ASSESSMENT POLICY I MSA vs. Local Roads; Why Any Assessments? - MSA routes largely paid by state funds - Some remainder items; i.e. drainage, sidewalks over 5 feet wide - Currently budgeting about $200,000 for local road reconstruction - from general fund; entire City paying for local rd. - sufficient for about 1/4 to 1/2'rule per year (0.7% to 1.4%) - roads would be rebuilt every 70 to 140 years - assessing 1/3 of cost; allows rebuild every 45 to 90 years Benefit Principle - rate must be uniformly and equally applied to all parcels - assessment must be confined to property receiving special benefit - amount of assessment must not exceed benefit - necessitates appraisal if assessment is large M Assessment Methods - frontage - parcel i Total lot number - assessment by total number of equivalent building units available Adjusted Footage -adjustments to front foot based on irregular lots -generally divide area by lot general depth Equivalent Street Assessments - for use above local requirements; construction greater than local - assess only for equivalent local street i Pond easement area credits - net assessable area reduced by pond acreage Comer Lots A - full assessment on driveway (front house) side - 1/2 or 113 assessment on others - do not include remainder in total assessed frontage - include sharply curving street ' I Hardship j - gross income below some level j - age - council discretion C I I I i • � 1 i t ff! EEi i i i j i I i E I City of Shorewood Financial Management Plan December 8, 2016 Street Maintenance Fund Projected Projected Projected Projected REVENUES 2016 2017 2018 2019 Beginning Balance 1,453,048 1,725,148 (106,752) (1,254,052) Assessment Bond Proceeds - - - - Interest Earnings 77300 87600 (27500) (27500) Transfers in 7557000 7707000 7857000 8007000 Total Revenue 762,300 778,600 782,500 797,500 EXPENDITURES CAPITAL OUTLAY Other Improvements 4907200 276107500 179297800 8337100 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 490,200 2,610,500 1,929,800 833,100 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 490,200 2,610,500 1,929,800 833,100 Revenue over/(under) 2727100 (178317900) (171477300) (357600) Ending Fund Balance 1,725,148 (106,752) (1,254,052) (1,289,652) 2016 2017 2018 2019 Reconstruction Projects 8267000 175847000 - 20% 1657200 3167800 - 30% 2473800 4753200 - 40% 3307400 6337600 50% 4137000 7927000 - Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 (1,289,652) (1,546,752) (2,880,452) (2,539,152) (2,842,352) (27700) (47000) (107700) (87900) (107500) 8157000 8307000 8457000 8607000 8757000 812,300 826,000 834,300 851,100 864,500 170697400 2,159,700 4937000 1,154,300 3227600_ 1,069,400 2,159,700 493,000 1,154,300 322,600 1,069,400 2,159,700 493,000 1,154,300 322,600 (2577100) (173337700) 3417300 (3037200) 5417900 (1,546,752) (2,880,452) (2,539,152) (2,842,352) (2,300,452) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 6297000 176737000 - - - 41712,000 1257800 3347600 - - - 9421400 1883700 5013900 - - - 1,413,600 2517600 6697200 - - - 1,884,800 3147500 8367500 - - - 2,356,000 #3C MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Franchise Agreements&Fees Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud Attachments: League of MN Cities Information Memo Elk River Finds Its Way to Smoother Roads—MN Cities,July/Aug 2016 Franchise fee print out from Xcel Energy Background: Cities have authority under franchise agreement to charge fees to the companies for the rights contained in the agreement. Those fees are passed onto the utility user through their monthly charges. Included with this memo is a list of cities that have a franchise agreement with Xcel Energy and the franchise fees charged to various customer types. The story about the City of Elk River's gives a good description of the process of using franchise fees as a source of revenue to fund street maintenance projects. In addition to beginning discussions with Xcel about a franchise agreement, I have also spoken to the city's representative in the government relations department at CenterPoint Energy about a franchise agreement. Financial or Budget Considerations: Options: The reality of the situation is the city is going to have to make choices about funding street repair/maintenance projects. Decisions as to how to finance the improvements, by; increasing the tax levy, using assessments, bonding, and franchise fees, or some combination, must occur. There is a push at the Legislature for the State to increase funding to help share in the cost to maintain local roads. To rely on that source puts the city at a substantial risk to not meet our obligation to the residents to adequately maintain our roads. Recommendation/Action Requested: Determine if this financing method is something the city should consider and investigate further. Next Steps/Timeline: Begin discussions with Xcel Energy and Centerpoint Energy for new franchise agreements. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel 00 INFORMATION MEMO LEAGUE OF Electric III Franchising MINNESOTA CITIES Learn about city gas and electric utility fi°canchising authority, especially authority to charge franchise fees. This memo includes links to tivo model fa•cinchise ordinances incoaporating cite rights under state lain and many of the Minnesota Public. Utility Connnission's right-of-way inanagenient rules, and two sample franchise fee ordinances. The League thanks James Strommen of the Kennedy and Graven Law Firm,who is attorney for the Suburban Rate Authority,for his assistance in creating this memo and the model and sample ordinances. RELEVANT LINKS: I. Franchising authority Cities have broad gas and electric franchise rights under state law. In Minnesota, these franchises are negotiated and take the form of a contract set forth in an ordinance. Cities have the right to require franchises and to Minn.stat.§2166.36,Minn, include certain terms, such as franchise fees. There is little case law stat.§30113.01.Minn.stat." guidance on what specific franchise terms may be required by the city. 222.37,Minn.Stat.§237,162 and Minn.stat.§237,163. Accordingly, a franchise can incorporate all reasonable terms within the limits of a city's statutory franchise and police power authority. These rights are extensive and can be found in state statute and case law. IL Franchising ordinances There has been no legislative change in the scope of city franchise authority in recent years. The main focus of discussion involving gas and electric franchises in the post-1999 right-of-way standards rules by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) is the franchise fee. That remains a Minn,R.ch.7819. matter negotiated with the utility but also one where cities should take care to retain their full franchise fee rights in the franchise agreement itself. A. Fees a°recrric Utility Vranchise The city's legal right to include a particular franchise provision, and the Fee,City of victoria sample ordinance. practical realities facing a city when the utility refuses to agree, are two quite Gas Lrtrbty Franehise Fee, different matters. Though a city may have the right to insist on a franchise City of Victoria sample ordinance. fee,potentially as high as 8 percent of the utility's gross revenues, it is unlikely that the utility would readily agree to such a percentage, even though the utility passes the fee through to its customers within the city. This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice.Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. 145 University Ave.West www,lmc.org 12/5/2016 Saint Paul,MN 55103-2044 (651)281-1200 or(800)925-1122 ©2016 All Rights Reserved RELEVANT LINKS: Gas and electric utilities remain concerned that, despite their retained monopoly or near monopoly status, franchise fees will harin their position relative to perceived competitors. This fee pass-through also becomes an issue to the residential and business customers who pay the fee. Thus, cities must be careful to gauge the level of local acceptance or resistance to the exercise of their full franchise rights under the law. As a result of the realities of the franchise negotiation and community acceptance process, a "take it or leave it"fi,anchise ordinance that includes the imposition of ft-anchise fees and strict right-of-way management provisions may be difficult to enact without compromise. B. Right-of-way rules Minn.R.ch.7819. The two franchise ordinances offered here incorporate many of the MPUC's right-of-way management rules on such matters as street restoration, Gas Oility Franchise,:LMC relocation for utilities, construction performance bonds,mapping model ordinance. information, street vacation,removal of abandoned facilities, and E'leetric Uliury r°,aanchi c, indemnification. The MPUC right-of-way rules were largely a product of LMC model ordinance. negotiations between local government units and members of the utility industry, including a number of gas and electric providers. By all indications—lack of formal legal disputes over terms—these rules have been very successful. Minn.stat.§2 m7.163 subd. To take full advantage of the rules and to fully implement the right-of-way 2(1);). LMC information Memo, management authority granted to cities by Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162- .163, a Ret uhnirag Ciav n,his-°'f- city should consider adopting a comprehensive right-of-way management WCBb''. ordinance by exercising its option under state law. C. Model ordinance notes Gas Diliel,Yrcanchise,LMC The two model franchise ordinances offered here are the result of a model ordinance. cooperative effort between the League of Minnesota Cities and James Strommen of the Kennedy & Graven Law Firm, attorney for the Suburban 1's"lee°xa�ic l�ttHX}'Franchise, LMC model ordinance. Rate Authority(SRA), a joint powers organization consisting of 29 Twin City suburban municipalities. The models are based on actual ordinances that have been reviewed by gas and electric companies. Because these models are more city-oriented than many currently existing franchises,utilities have objected to many of the provisions contained in these models. As a result, there is likely to be negotiation on at least the following provisions: • Franchise fees; in form, amount, and class of service distinctions. • Fee obligation on perceived competitors. • Where a city seeks additional rate and service consideration regarding renewable energy or infrastructure investment. • Rights regarding city-requested location and relocation of facilities. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 12/5/2016 Gas and Electric Utility Franchising Page 2 RELEVANT LINKS: a The city's right b) auicod the franchise during the term. Each city in-List evaluate the importance oftbo provisions contained iothese models oasuch provisions may affect the city's particular needs. One franchise cannot fit all because o[the many variations o[city-utility relationships, including factors uoob as urban, suburban, or rural acUiogu; developing versus redeveloping cities; single versus multiple utilities serving the city;remiduodui-000xnoroia] customer mix; larger employer versus diversified economic base; the presence ofann|nic' uludlityoc contemplated utility; and revenue needs of the city. aecv m �m `c /»*^m// c' One section ix taken fiuzu the CitvofK4ioocapolie-}[co| |�ucrgy]�\ecbio omcmvuv|ma/oou"v.am ' Section)/.Service franchise. U introduces an agreement Lo obtain additional service and »y/uuxty`inn»'^n«mm reliability reporting from the utility for comparison purposes among other reporting, utility service un:ux. ?bcuo are matters guvoouud by the MPl]C and routinely oasoxo *v »� umc * »� ' pzoducedhyzo�u|uLoduiUitioa, but not on aoitn-hy-oitvbasis. This section mvuo/omumno^.ae0000uuo '� - ~ /o.Service reliability, iu slightly different, depending oo whether i1iuo gas or electric utility. infrastructure reporting. Electric utilities have reliability issues such as outages and reduced power. Gas utilities bring the public safety risk ofunsafe gas 1iuco when infrastructure ages. This type o[iutboouiioniu available to all customers through the MPOC. Putting opzovioion in the franchise establishing annual reporting may heighten the city and the company's avvurnuoaV of where imyrovc000u1y can be made within the city. For cities interested in establishing additional dialog with the utility and identifying its service record iuthe bmocbiocd city when compared with other cities, this provision can achieve greater awareness and perhaps heightened attention bY the utility io the needs of the city. UUU. Further assistance ance James Strom men For more information, contact the League or James 8tnro/men. 612.337.9233 jounmmeoOXcocdy- umvu.omv. Tom ummmoefer,uC General Counsel »o,«x/.u^6 800»25,1122 League of Minnesota Cities Information � womv 12/5o06 Gas and Electric Utility Franchising Page 3 „,Worldeas in Action P)10TO BY MICHAEL BRAUN tr 11I1111�11111k itiver 0, III PI� -inds Its Way to Smoother Roads, BY ANDREWTELLIJOHN Elk Mayor John Dietz has served about 20 years as a councilmember and then mayor for the City of Elk River.During that span,his least favorite part of the job has been adding assessments to residents'property taxes for road projects near their homes. But he also thought that was the fairest approach to ensuring that people "When he first presented [the fran- proposed charging each customer$5 paid their share for the wear and tear on chise fee option],I was a little skeptical,” on their electric bill and $4 on their gas the roads.And that didn't change right Dietz says,"I kept thinking to myself, bill each month.Businesses pay higher away when City Engineer Justin Femrite 'Can we really generate enough money rates. The funds are dedicated specifi- and other city staff in 2012 proposed from this to do the road projects we need cally to maximizing the lifespan of the switching from assessments to monthly, to do?'I was skeptical we could generate city's streets through maintenance and pay-as-you-go franchise fees collected enough funds without having a tremen- rehabilitation. from citizens as part of their gas and dously high fee' "They convinced the Council that this electric bills, But Femrite and his colleagues could work,"Dietz says."Justin con- worked through the numbers.They vinced the Council to do this,and he deserves the credit.' Increased road costs on the horizon In 2012,about 80 percent of the city s " streets were in very good condition, but the upcoming five to 10 years were going to bring an increase in projects and costs because roads that were built in the 1990s and 2000s were coming up for maintenance. We had to start spending more money than we were used to spending because we had a larger system,"Ferri- rite says. That's why he proposed the franchise fee and designed the new model.Under his proposal,special assessments for street improvements—and the lengthy public he rings that came along with them—would be eliminated.The city would pay for improvements as they became necessary,so they could more City Engineer Jason Femrite,left,and MayorJohn Dietz stand on Orono Road Northwest,which received the efficiently use the proceeds of the new benefits last year of the city's new pavement management program. fee.In addition,the city agreed to waive 34 1 JUL/AUG 2016 1 MINNESOTA CITIES Ideas in Action%, the franchise fees for residents paying money,"'he says."It wasn't favorable for It's been around since 2003 and, previously levied assessments until those anyone—nobody has ever liked going despite City Council turnover since then, assessments were paid in full. through that process." the program has been in place and funds The change was implemented in 2013, Debbi Rydberg,executive director have been used only for the initially and the benefits went far beyond elim- with the Elk River Area Chamber,says intended purpose,Harmening says. inating large property tax assessments, the organization Femrite says.By collecting the money did not take sides ahead of time, the City Would be able to on the issue,but did keep enough on hand to pay for projects help the city dissem- as they were done rather than borrow- inate information ing the money.That has saved hundreds about the change of thousands of dollars in interest to its members.She payments,meaning more funds can be understands that the dedicated to work, change is likely more That also means street upkeep is more budget-friendly for frequent and regular,which increases the most people,and lifespan of the roads,city officials say, she did credit city officials with being Getting contimunity buy-hik upfront about the Mayor Dietz and City Engineer Femrite look at distressed pavement in need Getting the community on board was key proposed change and of reconstruction. to making the change successful, open to suggested "We waited until the Council gave alterations. "We have a traditionally strong com- direction that they were steering this I think[city leaders]were very open mitment to maintaining our infrastruc- way," Femrite says. "They said,'Why about it:'Rydberg says."They wanted to ture and upgrading it;'he says."We do don't you gauge the interest level of hear the concerns." have turnover on the Council,but we've the community?"' Since the franchise fees were imple- always had councilmembers who have The city sent mailings to all residents mented,she has not heard any com- seen the value of what we're doing.That and worked through the Elk River plaints from the local business commu- certainly helps.It's never been an issue, Area Chamber of Commerce to engage nity—an indication that the move has not not even remotely," business leaders.Staff attended business been problematic. St.Louis Park officials are satisfied group meetings and also set up a blog for I talk to businesses all the time,"she with their program 13 years after it was comments and questions. says."I hear them complain about plenty implemented.And,so far,Elk River lead- Femrite says he responded to many of things.I would be one of the people ers believe city officials now and in the queries,but he had a sense the idea was to hear about it,especially since we did future will agree that this was the right catching on when some critics were shot provide the information" move to make. down by supporters before he had a "This has been a real positive," chance to answer. Modeled afteiv,St.!,.ouis Femrite says. "The one thing I really feel was benefi- Park program In fact,Dietz quickly came full circle cial for us on that blog was when people The franchise fee model seems to be despite his early doubts and now sup- would post critical things of government growing in popularity.Dietz says Elk ports the franchise fee 100 percent. and what we were trying to do,propo- River officials have been contacted by "I've heard very few cornplaints about nents for it outside the city staff would several cities seeking insight about how this fee since it was implemented,"he argue for making a change like this," the change has worked.And Femrite says,"To get charged$108 a year for Femrite says"I think that really helped in indicates that the Elk River franchise fee street repair?I don't know how you can having that open dialogue between com- was modeled after programs introduced get by any cheaper than that.I'm a con- munity members without me necessarily in a couple cities several years ago. vent.It's proven that it works."E�B having to make every response.That One of them was a program instituted goes a long way—it's not the city telling by St.Louis Park several years ago under Andrew Tellijohn is a freelance writer based in everyone the answers," which the city collects$3.25 from both Richfield,Minnesota. While there were doubters and oppo- gas and electric users each month to nents,Femrite says,once people started cover the cost of street rehabilitation.St. understanding that the change would Louis Park City Manager Tom Har- mean an end to the assessment system of mening says the franchise fee has been Chi tho,',,we the past,momentum gathered in support adjusted every other year to keep up with of the change. the cost of construction,but adds that the For more city news,visit ww, I don't care whether it's real life or fee has allowed St.Louis Park to maintain www.imc.org/Citynews. Monopoly,nobody likes to get the card its roads on a pay-as-you-go basis with- saying'You received a notice from the out assessing residents for the cost. city for street repairs;pay this much MINNESOTA CITIES I JUL/AUG 2016 35 Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation f Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES Section No. 5 19th Revised Sheet No. 93.1 Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. Indicates fee is not applied I i Franchise Fees i w m c ' v m v a V rn rn E CL c a c aNi E o E i m 3 3= o > >a � i X v Y v) z cna o- - M M z 2ao I Afton $2.00 $2.00 $5.00 $5.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 01/2005 08/16/2024 I Albertville $2.50 $5.00 $10.00 $50.00 $2.00 - - 03/2011= 09/07/2029 Bayport $1.50 $3.00 $25.00 $50.00 $3.00 $3.00 $25.00 ',01/20 14 05/04/2028 Big Lake $4.00 $8.00 $8.00 $8.00 - - - 90/2014 07/04/2034 Bloomington $3.75 $7.50 $40.00 $115.00 - - - 04/2016 12/20/2035 L I Center Brooklyn $1.60 $4.00 $22.00 $100.00 $13.00 $13.00 $13.00 0112017 12108120231 LRC i Brooklyn Park $7.00 $7.50 $45.00 $160.00 - - - 03/2016 12/31/2028 Burnsville $1.00 $3.00 $10.00 $45.00 - - - 0712016 "02/1512036 I Centerville $4.00 $8.00 $8.00 $8.00 - - - 05/2016 01/26/2036 1 i Champlin $3.50 $9.50 $40.00 $140.00 $17.00 $17.00 $17.00 0412016 11/23/2028 Chisago City $1.30 $5.00 $15.00 $55.00 $5.00 $5.00 $15.00 06/2009, Circle Pines $2.75 $3.00 $35.00 - $3.00 - - 1012009 08/24/2029 Clara City $2.00 $2.00 $15.00 $68.00 $2.00 $2.00 $15.00 <"01/2014 10/0712033 Clements $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 - - - 07/2012 06/09/2024 Coon Rapids' 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% - - - 01/2012 01/13/2032 Cottage Grove $1.65 $1.65 $8.25 $33.00 $3.30 $0.75 $8.25 03/2016 11/04/2023 I I I I Coon Rapids: The franchise fee excludes rate schedules for highway lighting,municipal street lighting,municipal water pumping, municipal fire sirens,and municipal sewage disposal service. j I (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.1a) E Date Filed: 10-25-16 By: Christopher B.Clark Effective Date: 01-01-17 j President, Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES Section No. 5 Original Sheet No. 93.1a Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: i The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. Indicates fee is not applied i I Franchise Fees 06 E 06 i C V d V V V{ Q C d" a' C q... r aNi E o E m `m ; 0 = o 1 m d w X v W rnz U) ❑ -J az Via ❑ w L i Deephaven $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 04/2002 11/02/2030 G Dilworth $2.60 $6.00 $21.00 $136.50 - $6.00 $21.00 01/2011 05110/2018 t Eagle Lake $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 - - - 10%2012 05/06/2032 C i Eden Prairie $2.50 $3.00 $10.00 $45.00 - - - 10/2012 06/18/2032 Edina $1.95 $3.40 $9.50 $40.50 - - - 03/2016 11/03/2035 Excelsior $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 11/2012 08/02/2032 L i I f i (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.2) Date Filed: 01-14-16 By: Christopher B.Clark Effective Date: 04-01-16 President,Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 i i Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES(Continued) Section No. 5 14th Revised Sheet No. 93.2 Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. Indicates fee is not applied I i Franchise Fees i d U y U c V c a 0 a c U) M m .E rn a r c E" r- r- E E a 0 E o E a m > > o = 3 w " v rr' viz rno a az Sao w uS Faribauit' $1.35 $1.60 $32.00 $280.00 - - - 01/2006 11/08/2024 Forest Lake $4.00 $2.50 $18.50 $75.00 $7.50 $2.50 $18.50 0512013 01/27/2033 Golden Valley $2.00 $2.00 $22.50 $206.00 - - - 01/2013 12/17/2027 Goodview $2.75 $3.00 $25.00 $110.00 $25.00 $2.50 $10.00 '07/2006" 04130/2026 Grant $2.35 $2.00 $14.00 $75.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 `01/2015 12701/2023 Hayfield $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 -01/2015: 04/17/2031 i Henderson $3.00 $3.00 $3.00 $3.00 - - - 04/2012. 08116/2031 Hopkins $2.20 $3.85 $15.50 $105.50 - - - 01/2014 12131/2018 Landfall Village $2.25 $4.75 $14.00 $65.00 $15.50 - - 0412014 1211012033 Lexington $2.25 $3.75 $25.00 $130.00 $3.75 $3.75 $25.00 11/2012; 10/05/2031 Lindstrom $2.50 $5.00 $24.00 $70.00 $7.00 $7.00 $7.00 0412016 12117/2028 R Little Canada $2.75 $5.25 $40.00 $230.00 $15.50 $2.00 $3.00 07/2010! 08/2672023 Madison Lake $1.00 $1A0 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 05/2013; " 02/0312033", Mahtomedi $1.30 $1.38 $14.40 $110.28 $12.71 $0.63 $14.84 01/2005 10/18/2024 Mankato $1.00 $1.55 $16.50 $223.00 $1.00 $0.25 $1.00 0212015 0912172034 Mantorville $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 1112012 08/12/2032 Maplewood $1.25 $2.50 $15.00 $112.50 $1.25 $1.25 $1.25 12/2013 09/26/2024 I I Faribault: The franchise fee excludes invoices to the city for street lighting and municipal pumping. j (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.3) Date Filed: 01-22-16 By: Christopher B.Clark Effective Date: 04-01-16 President, Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation t Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES(Continued) Section No. 5 13th Revised Sheet No. 93.3 Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. Indicates fee is not applied Franchise Fees I a " R d! U m U' c U c °' a °' c c c u 'a w E o E w 3 o" aEi m a cnz W ❑ a- -j dz a ❑ w w 3.0% >100 kW at primary or 5.0% 5.0% higher voltage Minneapolis 4.5% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 01/2015 10/1612024 <100 kW <100 kW 5.0% >100 kW at secondary voltage Minnetonka $2.50 $4.50 $4.50 $4.50 - $4.50 $4.50 11/2007 08/09/2018 Monticello $1.95 $5.50 $31.00 $190.00 $12.00 $12.00 $31.00 06/2007 05/31/2027 Mound $2.75 $2.75 $2.75 $2.75 $2.75 $2.75 $2.75 01/2017 12/31/2020 Mounds View 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 01/2017 12/31/2017: C $0.0047 $0.0043 $0.0033 $0.0017 $0.0054 $0.0046 $0.0033 New Brighton 0312016 11/25/2022 per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh New Hope $3.00 $6.00 $26.00 $115.00 - - - 01/2017 06/26/2031 RC New Richland $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 - - - 02/2013 07/11/2024 Newport $1.00 $1.50 $14.00 $70.00 $5.00 $1.00 $10.00 01/2011 10/18/2026 II (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.4) Date Filed: 10-25-16 By: Christopher B.Clark Effective Date: 01-01-17 President, Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES(Continued) Section No. 5 17th Revised Sheet No. 93.4 1 I Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. Indicates fee is not applied i Franchise Fees I v E otS! v 06 w �a rn E m rn o aCii V d U, V N a c m CL c > a - m a r '� 'a v `u 'FL m E o E aE, rn o aEi v toz rn ❑ _J, a � az a ❑ W w t North Mankato $1.00 $1.55 $16.50 $223.00 $17.62 $1.46 $12.30 04/2015 10105/2034 Oakdale $1.50 $3.00 $10.00 $8.00 $6.00 $2.00 $8.00 11/2013 10/27/2023 Osseo $1.28 $2.07 $17.57 $102.65 $6.20 $0.45 $2.55 03/2012 10/2612023 Owatonna $0.0016 per kWh Customer peak demand less than 100 kW in calendar year 01!2003 04101/2022 $0.0014 per kWh Customer peak demand greater than 100 kW in calendar year Plymouth $2.00 $3.00 $10.00 $40.00 - - - 05/2014 07/09/2027 i Prior Lake $1.50 $5.00 $10.00 $50.00 - - - 07/2006 03/1912026 Richmond $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 - - - 05/2013 05/03/2031 Richfield $4.10 $12.50 $30.00 $185.00 - - - 04!2014 0311212027 i Robbinsdale 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 06/2015 07101/2017 Rogers $5.00 $7.00 $45.00 $210.00 $17.00 $12.00 $65.00 01/2,016' 11/22/2024 Sartell $4.00 $6.75 $15.00 $109.00 - - - 01/2017. 09/11/2036 RC 4.0% Customers who purchase$50,000 or less in calendar year Sauk Rapids 02/2016 06/15/2023 1.5% That part which exceeds$50,000 in calendar year i Shakopee' 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% - - - 01/2017 08/06/2021 N i f Shoreview $2.50 $3.00 $30.00 $310.00 - - - 10/2013 07/17/2031 i i i 'Shakopee: The fee collected shall total three percent(3%)of the Company's gross revenues from its operations within the City collected N from each customer of each class.For customers in the Large C&I class,the three percent franchise fee is applicable to the first$950,000 N of calendar year gross revenues.The franchise fee is reduced to one-half percent(0.5%)for the remaining amount of annual gross N revenues exceeding$950,000. D (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.5) Date Filed: 10-25-16 By: Christopher B. Clark Effective Date: 01-01-17 President, Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 Northern States Power Company,a Minnesota corporation Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC RATE BOOK-MPUC NO.2 FRANCHISE AND OTHER CITY FEES(Continued) Section No. 5 13th Revised Sheet No. 93.5 Franchise and other city fees,as designated below will be included in the customers'monthly bills computed under the indicated rate classes and effective in the following Minnesota communities: The Company remits 100%of these fees collected from ratepayers to the local government unit. - Indicates fee is not applied Franchise Fees � ate, V aEi U; V' a = 0i a c > w 'O. M 'U 'C. W V y N m E rn n s E' c c E E m a w E o E 0 o a = d x v W wz co 0 ate o z lac w w 4 South St.Paul' 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% - - - 07/2015 04/05/2030 Spicer $1.00 $1.00 $8.00 $8.00 - - - 02/2013 10/0112032 E Spring Lake $0.80 $1.20 $8.50 $50.00 - - - 04/2015 01/04/2035 Park St.Cloud 2 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% - - - 09/2007 08/31/2027 2% I purchase <$100,000 in calendar year St.Joseph $1.00 $1.75 $10.00 $8.00 $1.00 $10.00 02/2004 11/19/2623 1.5% that part >$100,000 in calendar year St.Louis Park $4.00 $8.50 $45.00 $145.00 - $8.50 $45.00 02/2017 09/18/2036 ' R St.Michael $3.50 $2.50 $2.50 $10.00 $10.00 $2.50 $10.00 0512011 '11/24/2023 St.Paula See fee schedule in the Notes section on the following sheets. 11/2006 08/31/2026 St.Paul Park $1.50 $2.00 $25.00 $335.00 $10.00 $1.00 $5.00 08/2005' 05/15/2025 Stillwater $2.00 $2.50 $18.00 $125.00 $4.00 $2.00 $18.00 06/2015 ' 02/16/2035 I I South St.Paul: The franchise fee excludes rate schedules for highway lighting,municipal street lighting,municipal water pumping, municipal traffic signals,municipal fire sirens,and municipal sewage disposal service. ! 2 St.Cloud: The franchise fee for residential heating customers will be 1.5%during the months of November-April. i 3 St.Paul: The monthly franchise fee will be as stated on the following sheets.The residential service franchise fee will be as stated except during the months of November-April when there will be no fee.The fee shall not exceed$620,000 during any calendar year from any large commercial and industrial customer qualifying for service on the Competitive Market Rider.The schedule on the following sheets show the meter,energy,and demand factor for each year of the St.Paul franchise and for each of the customer classifications. (Continued on Sheet No.5-93.6) Date Filed: 11-21-16 By: Christopher B.Clark Effective Date: 02-01-17 President, Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation j Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970 Order Date: 03-23-11 S #4A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Organized Waste Collection Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud Reviewed by: Attachments: League of MN Cities Memo, MN Pollution Control Agency Info Sheet, Excerpt from MN PCA Report, Memorandum of Understanding example from Arden Hills Background: Solid waste collection is a politically charged issue with strong feelings, particularly for those who desire to select their own hauler. Bloomington, Edina, and St. Paul are some recent examples of cities that have gone through the process of trying to organize garbage collection. Reasons to move to an organized system include lower cost to the consumer as well as less wear and tear on streets. There are groups that say the data does not support either of those conclusions. Those opposed most often want to retain their right to choose their hauler, and the right to select a different hauler if their price or service, in their opinion, is not competitive. Moving to an organized system of collection most definitely limits those two decisions. Financial or Budget Considerations: The city realizes$1,300 to $1,500 in annual fees for licensing garbage haulers. That is a very minimal number. As stated previously, opposition to organized collection is not generally based on financial considerations, but that does not make opposition any less intense. Options: Contained in the attachment is the statutory process the city must follow if it wants to move toward organized collection. The memo from Arden Hills is an example of keeping an open system, but working with the haulers to make some changes to their methods of collection. The Council could also decide to consider a system that has the characteristics of both an open and organized system. The City Attorney will present information about this. Recommendation/Action Requested: 1. If the council wants to consider organized collection— begin the process of gathering information -from engineer about effect of garbage trucks, other cities' experiences, survey residents, etc. 2. Stay with present system, but consider some changes such as increasing license fees or other changes. Work out memorandum of understanding as Arden Hills did for some specific changes the city wants implemented. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel RELEVANT LINKS: Minn.Stat,§ 115A.923. ® All tipping fees collected at waste management facilities owned or For more information about these fees see Section III.B., operated by the city. City Fees.Minn.scat.§ ® All city charges for waste collection and management sel vices. 115A.929, ® Any other fees, charges, or surcharges imposed on waste for the purpose of waste management,whether collected directly from generators, indirectly through property taxes, or as part of utility or other charges for city-provided services. Minn.Stat.§ 1 1 5A.94 5. Any city that provides or pays for the costs of collection or disposal of solid waste must,through a billing or other system,make the prorated share of those costs for each solid waste generator visible and obvious to the generator. i IV. Solid waste and recycling collection A. Types of collection systems—open collection and organized collection ,4na(ysis oj'YYaste Collection The two main types of collection systems for solid waste and recycling are Service Arrangements, Minnesota Pollution Control commonly referred to as "open collection" "organized organized collection,»A Agency,June 2009. 2009 study authorized by the MPCA estimated that the number of cities with open solid waste collection was between 65 to 80 percent, and the number of cities with organized solid waste collection was between 20 to 35 percent. The same study indicated that the number of cities with open recycling was estimated to be between 40 to 60 percent, and the number of cities with organized recycling was estimated to be between 50 to 60 percent. Open collection is generally defined as a collection system where individual residents and businesses are free to contract with any collector licensed to do business in the city. i Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subds. Organized collection is defined as a"system for collecting solid waste in 1,3.See Section IV.D., Procedural requireme»is for which a specified collector, or a member of an organization of collectors, is adopting organized authorized to collect from a defined geographic service area or areas some or collection,for more information, all of the solid waste that is released by generators for collection."A city must comply with certain procedural requirements in the organized collection statute before adopting organized collection of solid waste. Minn.Stat.§ I ISA.94,subd. A city may organize collection as a municipal service where city employees 3. collect solid waste from a defined geographic service area or areas. In the alternative, cities may organize collection by using one or more private collectors or an organization of collectors. The agreement with the private collectors may be made through an ordinance, franchise, license,negotiated or bidded contract, or by other means. i League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/8/2016 City Solid Waste Management Page 11 RELEVANT LINKS: Minn,Stat.§471.345.Minn. The competitive bidding requirements in state law do not apply to contracts Stat.§412.311.Schwan& sanitarian o Tgpnesri(le v, for solid waste collection because solid waste collection services do not Ciry orPa.,',es'�ule,423 meet the definition of a"contract"that is subject to the Uniform Municipal N.W.2d 59(Minn.Ct.App. 1988. Contracting Law. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94.su bd. Organized collection accomplished by contract or as a municipal service 3.Minn.Stat.§ 115A.86. may include a requirement that all or any portion of the solid waste—except recyclable materials and materials that are processed at a resource-recovery facility at the capacity in operation at the time the requirement is imposed— be delivered to a waste facility identified by the city. In a district or county where a resource-recovery facility has been designated by ordinance, organized collection must conform to the ordinance's requirements. j Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subd. Cities are prohibited from establishing or administering organized collection 3. in a way that impairs recycling. Further, cities must exempt recyclable materials from organized collection upon a showing by the person who generates the recyclables or a collector of recyclables that the materials are f or will be separated from mixed municipal solid waste by the generator, separately collected, and delivered for reuse in their original form or for use in a manufacturing process. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,snbds. It is not absolutely clear whether a city that decides to enter into an 1,3. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.03, subds.25a and 31.Minn. agreement for the collection of recyclable materials, including source- Stat.§ 116.06,snbd.22. separated compostable materials,with one collector or an organization of collectors is required to comply with the procedural requirements in the organized collection statute. The answer likely depends on whether the definition of"solid waste"referenced in the organized collection statute should be interpreted to include recyclable materials. The MPCA has taken the position (while advising cities that they should consult their city attorneys)that recyclable materials are not subject to the organized collection statute because they are not a part of solid waste or mixed municipal solid waste once they have been separated out for separate collection and recycling. l t`a.sre Rees.eq Coop.of The Minnesota Court of Appeals,in a published opinion, considered a Minnesota v.Counrp of Hemiepin,475 N.W.2d 892 similar issue of whether telephone directories collected for recycling were (Minn.Ct.App.1991). subject to a county's designation ordinance requiring mixed municipal solid waste to be disposed of at a county-designated facility. The court of appeals concluded that the telephone directories did not meet the definition of mixed municipal solid waste or of solid waste because they were being collected for recycling in a"separate waste stream"and were not being"discarded" as j solid waste. If a city is considering entering into an agreement for the collection of recyclable materials with one collector or an organization of collectors, it should consult its city attorney to determine whether it must follow the procedural requirements in the organized collection statute. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/8/2016 City Solid Waste Management Page 12 i RELEVANT LINKS: B. Organized collection is generally optional Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subd. The organized collection statute provides that the authority to organize the 6. collection of solid waste is optional and is in addition to authority governing solid waste collection granted by other law. The statute also provides that a city may exercise any authority granted by any other law, including a home rule charter,to govern collection of solid waste. A city would only be required to organize collection if the county in which it is located has by ordinance required cities within its jurisdiction to organize collection. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.03,snbd. The Waste Management Act defines cities as "statutory and home rule 4.Minn.Stat.§ I I5A.94. charter cities authorized to plan under sections 462.351 to 462.364." Therefore,both statutory and home rule charter cities may adopt organized collection using the procedures outlined in the organized collection statute. C. Open collection versus organized collection: pros and cons i 1. Open collection Anaitwis of ff'aste Collection There are several frequently cited advantages of open collection: Service Arrangements, j Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,June 2009. • Residents have more choice and are free to select a solid waste collector based on their preference. • There is a direct relationship between the solid waste collector and its customers. • There are minimal administrative costs for cities. • Smaller solid waste collectors are better able to enter the market in an open collection system by servicing a portion of city residents. Analysis of IPaste Collection In contrast,there are several frequently cited disadvantages of open Service Arrangements, Minnesota Pollution Control collection: Agency,June 2009. • Open collection generally results in a more expensive monthly cost for residents. • Multiple collectors means more truck traffic and the resulting negative side effects, including the potential for added street maintenance costs, and increased vehicle noise and emissions,fuel consumption, and vehicle accidents. • There may be inconsistent charges for the same level of service in a city. • Cities have reduced ability to manage solid waste collection. I f League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/812016 City Solid Waste Management Page 13 RELEVANT LINKS: 2. Organized collection There are several frequently cited advantages of organized collection: The Benefit.,of orga,ri7ed The price paid by households in an organized collection system is Collection.Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, generally lower per month for similar service levels than in an open Feb.2012.Analysis of nuste collection system due to increased efficiencies from serving every Collection Service !Arrangements,Minnesota household or business in the community or on a particular route. Pollution Control Agency, • Limiting he number of solid waste collectors allows cities to decrease June 2009. g the impacts of increased truck traffic, including the potential for added street maintenance costs, vehicle noise and emissions, fuel consumption, and vehicle accidents. • Cities have greater ability to manage solid waste collection and can establish service requirements. • Standardized service makes public education easier. • Cities' ability to seek requests for proposals on a regular basis helps lower costs. Anal J;sis of lf'aste Collection In contrast,there are several frequently cited disadvantages of organized Seriice Arrangements, Minnesota Pollution Control collection: Agency,June 2009. • Households and businesses do not get to choose their collector. • Cities have greater administrative involvement and costs. • Small collectors have higher entry costs to get into the market and competitive opportunities are limited to contract openings. • The statutory requirements for switching from open to organized collection are time consuming and can be difficult politically. D. Procedural requirements for adopting organized collection Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94.2013 There are several procedural steps a city must take before it is authorized to Minn.Laws ch.45.See Appendix A,Organized adopt organized collection of solid waste. The Minnesota Legislature Collection Flowchart• adopted significant changes to the organized collection statute in 2013 that were designed to simplify the process for adopting organized collection. Any city that has adopted organized collection as of May 1,2013,is exempt from the new requirements. NJ inn.Stat.§ 1 15A.03,subd. The Waste Management Act defines cities as"statutory and home rule 4.Minn.Stat.§ t 1 5A.94. I charter cities authorized to plan under sections 462.351 to 462.364." Therefore,both statutory and home rule charter cities may adopt organized collection using the procedures outlined in the organized collection statute. i 4I i League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/8/2016 City Solid Waste Management Page 14 RELEVANT LINKS: 1. Notice to public and to licensed collectors Minn.Stat.§I I5A.94,subd. A city must first give notice to the public and to any licensed collectors that 4d.Minn.Stat.§331A.03. it is considering adopting organized collection. State law does not specify how notice should be provided. The League recommends providing both published notice and individual mailed notice to each licensed collector. 2. 60-day negotiation period with licensed collectors Minn.star.§ I15.A.94,subd. After the city provides notice of its intent to consider adopting organized 4d, collection, it must provide a 60-day negotiation period that is exclusive between the city and any collectors licensed to operate in the city. A city is not required to reach an agreement with the licensed collectors during this period. The purpose of the negotiation period is to allow the licensed collectors an opportunity to develop a proposal in which they, as i members of an organization of collectors,will collect solid waste from designated sections of the city. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subd. The proposal must contain identified city priorities, including issues related 4d. to zone creation,traffic, safety, enviromnental performance, service provided, and price, and must reflect existing collectors maintaining their respective market share of business as determined by each hauler's average customer count during the six months before the beginning of the 60-day I negotiation period. Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subd. If an existing collector opts to be excluded from the proposal,the city may 4d, allocate its customers proportionally based on market share to the participating collectors who choose to negotiate. i Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94,subd. If an organized collection agreement is established as a result of the 60-day 4d. Minn.Stat.§ I I5A.94,subd negotiation period,it must be in effect for a period of three to seven years. 4o• Upon execution of an agreement between the participating licensed LMCIT staff can assist in reviewing city contracts, collectors and the city,the city shall establish organized collection through especially provisions related appropriate local controls. The city does not need to establish an organized to insurance and liability. For more information, collections options committee if it reaches an agreement with the licensed contact Chris Smith,Risk Management Attorney,at haulers during the 60-day negotiation period; however,the city must first csmith@(i)hnc.org or 651-281- provide public notice and a public hearing before officially deciding to 1269• implement organized collection. Organized collection may begin no sooner than six months after the effective date of the city's decision to implement organized collection. i 3. Organized collection options committee Minn.Stat.§ 115A.94 subd If a city does not reach an agreement with its licensed collectors during the 4a.Minn.Slat.ch. 13D. 60-day negotiation period, it can form by resolution an"organized collection options committee"to study various methods of organized collection and to issue a report. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/8/2016 City Solid Waste Management Page 15 RELEVANT LINKS: The city council appoints the committee members. The committee is subject to the open meeting law and has several mandatory duties. Minn.star.§ 1 15x.94,subd. First, the committee shall determine which methods of organized collection 4b. to examine,which must include: a system in which a single collector collects solid waste from all sections of the city; and a system in which multiple collectors, either singly or as members of an organization of collectors, collect solid waste from different sections of the city. Minn.Stat.§ 115x.94,sued. Second,the committee shall establish a list of criteria on which the 4b. organized collection methods selected for examination will be evaluated, which may include: costs to residential subscribers,miles driven by collection vehicles on city streets and alleys, initial and operating costs of implementing the organized collection system,providing incentives for waste reduction, impacts on solid waste collectors, and other physical, economic, fiscal, social, environmental, and aesthetic impacts. Minn.star.§ 115x.94,subd. Third,the committee shall collect information regarding the operation and 4b. efficacy of existing methods of organized collection in other cities and towns. Minn.Stat.§1159.94,subd. Fourth,the committee shall seek input from, at a minimum: 4b. • The city council • The city official responsible for solid waste issues • Persons currently licensed to operate solid waste collection and recycling services in the city • City residents who currently pay for residential solid waste collection services i i Minn.star.§ 115A.94,subd. Finally,the committee must issue a report on its research, findings, and any 4b. recommendations to the city council. 4. Public notice and public hearing t Minn.Stat.§ I I5A.94,subd. A city council shall consider the report and recommendations of the 4c. organized collection options committee. A city must provide public notice and hold at least one public hearing before deciding to implement organized collection. 5. Implementation Minn.Stat.§I I5A.94,subd. A city can begin organized collection no sooner than six months after the Minn.Stat.§115x.94,subd. effective date of the city's decision to implement organized collection. A 3. city may organize collection as a municipal service where city employees collect solid waste fiom a defined geographic service area or areas. In the alternative, cities may organize collection by using one or more private solid waste collectors or an organization of collectors. I I League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/8/2016 City Solid Waste Management Page 16 RELEVANT LINKS: An agreement with private collectors may be made through an ordinance, franchise, license,negotiated or bidded contract, or by other means. V. Conclusion Cities have broad authority to regulate the collection and disposal of solid waste. Cities exercise this authority subject to state and county oversight. Cities should work closely with their city attorneys when exercising this authority by requiring licenses, imposing fees and assessments, entering into contracts, and adopting ordinances. Cities must comply with procedural requirements in the organized collection statute before they may adopt organized collection of solid waste. I i I I I i f I I i League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 3/812016 City Solid Waste Management Page 17 The Benefits of Organized Collection Minnesota Pollution Waste Collection Service Arrangements Control Agency February 2012 Overview In 2009, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) commissioned a study to develop quantifiable information comparing open and organized municipal solid waste (MSW) and recycling collection systems.The analysis revealed that organized collection systems consistently result in lower overall costs to consumers. In addition, recycling capture rates are typically higher in organized systems. Organized collection also reduces noise pollution, road wear, air emissions and fuel consumption. In an open collection system, individual customers choose their own waste hauler. In an organized system,waste hauling services are coordinated by a public entity through a competitive bidding process. Nearly 30 percent of the communities in Minnesota have organized MSW and recycling collection systems compared to 72 percent nationally. Following is a brief summary of the findings. A copy of the complete report, entitled Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements is available on the MPCA website at , gale us Economic benefits Lower residential service rates The report found consumers in organized MSW Average Monthly Rate collection cities experience reduced rates compared to Collection System 30 60 90 non-organized residents. A resident can save as much as Gallon Gallon Gallon $100 per year by living in a city with organized collection. Open MSW $22.64 $25.46 $25.46 For example, the city of Maplewood expects its residents Organized MSW $14.83 $16.98 $22.23 to save$1.6 million city-wide per year after a recent switch to an organized system.The average Maplewood Difference $7.81 $8.48 $3.23 household will see a 50 percent decrease in trash % Change +34.5% +33.3% +12.7% hauling bills compared to the open collection system. The averages in the table to the right include garbage service, taxes, surcharges and recycling service fees. Road wear Reducing the impact on roads and alleys, by reducing the number of heavy duty vehicles traveling on them is a benefit and goal of municipalities interested in moving from an open to an organized collection system. Organized cities typically have one truck traveling a particular route compared to two to eight trucks per route in an open system. Nearly 86 percent of the road wear in alleys and eight percent of the road wear in high traffic areas is due to garbage trucks. The potential economic impact of road maintenance costs associated with garbage trucks has been estimated by some city officials. For example,the city of Roseville estimates the cost to reconstruct one mile of seven-ton street at approximately$500,000. Roseville engineering staff believe the city's streets would last an estimated five to ten years longer if garbage truck traffic was limited.The reduced road maintenance could potentially save each of Roseville's 9,400 single family households $20 to$40 per year.This represents a savings of$188,000 to$376,000 per year. Similarly,the city of Oakdale has estimated that reducing the number of MSW haulers from five down to one traveling down an alley would conservatively result in a more than four percent reduction in street maintenance costs per year. With an annual street maintenance budget of$3 million, Oakdale could save$120,000 to more than $300,000 per year. Organized Collection • leg-12sy1-06 • February 2012 �r„ Minnesota Pollution,Page 1 of 2 '��' Control Agency Environmental benefits Recycling rates Cities with organized recycling collection Pounds recycled systems have a higher rate of recycled materials Collection System materials collected per collected per-household. Reasons include: household per year • Cities with organized recycling have more control over the details of the system Open MSW and recycling 510 (e.g. materials collected, sorting Open MSW/organized recycling 583 instructions for residents, collection days and frequency). Organized MSW and recycling 573 • Organized cities also have more control over public education tools and message Average for organized recycling 579 content—recycling public education campaigns are more cost-effective if outreach tools are consistent in message and design and available in several formats (brochures, web pages, public service announcements, etc.). • Cities with both organized MSW and recycling have the opportunity to reach the same residential audience with multiple service messages. Contacts with residents can address both MSW and recycling issues. Reduced fuel consumption and emissions Creating efficiencies in waste collection activities can reduce both fuel consumption and emissions. Fuel consumption during collection activities in cities with open collection systems is typically much higher than that of cities with organized systems.The numbers below signify the percentage of additional fuel used in these open cities than if they were to switch to an organized system. • Eagan 216% • Duluth 294% • Rochester 250% • Woodbury 355% • St. Paul 437% The number of haulers and their market share can affect overall fuel consumption and emissions. In an open system, trucks from many haulers travel the same alley. In an organized system there may be the same number of haulers, but only one truck travels down each alley, resulting in lower fuel use. Even open cities with one hauler having more than 60 percent of the market share (e.g. Eagan)would see a significant reduction in fuel use by switching to an organized system. A city with many haulers each having a smaller market share (e.g. St. Paul) would realize even greater savings. Fewer vehicle miles traveled also result in less air pollutant emissions from heavy duty waste/recycling collection vehicles. Public concern has increased regarding human health and environmental impacts of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides which are emitted in large amounts from heavy duty vehicles. Myths of organized collection Organized collection means that there will only be one hauler in the community. There are many examples of cities that have organized and chosen to use a group of haulers instead. In this situation, the city is zoned to maximize collection efficiency, but each hauler retains a certain market share. Small haulers will never win the contract. This depends upon the values of the city. If a city chooses to promote local and/or small businesses as criteria in their request for proposal, small haulers have an advantage. Organized collection creates a monopoly. The most effective method of keeping rates low is to consistently re-bid waste services through and open and competitive process. At the end of the contract period, the public entity reopens the competitive bidding process, to ensure that residents continue to receive the lowest rates available. Effective collection arrangements prevent monopolies and price gouging. Organized Collection • leg-12sy1-06 • February 2012 �r„ Minnesota Pollution,Page 2 of 2 '��' Control Agency Table 2-1 Advantages/Disadvantages of Open Collection Systems Advantages Disadvantages Choice—Households are free to . Usually results in a more expensive continue to choose their hauler based monthly cost on preference . Results in more truck traffic with There is a direct relationship between potential associated impacts of. the hauler and the customer that allows ► Added street maintenance the customer to shop around or change ► Air quality/vehicle emissions if dissatisfied ► Safety/vehicle accidents None to very minimal administrative ► Aesthetics (containers out more costs or burdens for public entities days of the week), noise, and litter Small haulers are more apt to compete . Inconsistent charges for the same level for a portion of the accounts—entry of service in a community, even among level requirements for new businesses customers of the same hauling is low company Haulers are more likely able to shop for . Reduced ability of the community to lower disposal prices or use their own effectively manage solid wastes E facilities . Haulers switching from one landfill to another due to price results in exposure to liability at more sites j i The primary advantage cited for open systems is the ability for people to choose their own hauler. There is a direct relationship between the individual customers and service provider that may supersede any other potential benefit. The customer is in control, making the decision to hire whoever is providing service in the community. The choice may be a matter of family i relationships, tradition,past experiences of inadequate service,price, etc. Open systems typically result in less administrative effort for the public entity,but also result in less overall control of the solid waste management system(less control on where waste is disposed, service levels, and diversion levels). Open systems may be better suited to smaller or start up businesses as the requirements for equipment and employees are controlled by the individual hauling company rather than set by the public entity contract. While there can be variations in pricing, the price paid by households in open systems is typically higher per month for similar service levels. This is primarily due to the increase in efficiency for haulers in organized collection systems serving every household in the community or on a route rather than driving by households served by other hauling companies. Also, in open systems where a particular hauling company is successful in gaining a predominant market share, there is less reason for the hauling company to pass on the improved efficiency to customers. The hauling company may increase its profitability in that specific community. 4•Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc June 2009 Open systems result in more truck traffic on the residential streets as each company uses their collection vehicles to service customers. The increased truck traffic leads to increased concerns regarding the impact on streets and the potential for increased truck emissions,traffic accidents, and aesthetic issues. Open systems are more likely to allow haulers to find the lowest cost disposal option(including transportation costs), but this also results in exposure to liability at more than one location. Open systems also are more likely to allow certain waste hauling companies to internalize wastes to their own transfer stations and/or landfills. This improves their competitive advantage for hauling customers versus haulers who do not have their own transfer or disposal facilities. 2.1.2 Organized Systems A comparison of the advantages (potential benefits) and disadvantages of organized collection systems is shown in Table 2-2. j E 4 t I� I i { E i I `tf t 4 i R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC•5 June 2009 I f I Table 2-2 Advantages/Disadvantages of Organized Collection Systems Advantages Disadvantages Increased efficiency enabling a lower . Households do not have a choice of cost per household their hauler . Decreased impacts from truck traffic . Greater administrative involvement by Decreased fuel consumption the public entity Greater control to establish service . Small haulers have higher"entry" requirements including: requirements to get in the business ► Ability to standardize service along with competitive opportunities makes public education simpler limited to contract openings ► Ability to provide access to special . Current organized collection statutory service needs at known, controlled process to convert from open to costs organized is cumbersome and difficult ► Volume-based pricing to achieve politically waste abatement goals ► Delivery destinations for processing j and overall solid waste f management ► Factors affecting recycling and diversion such as variable rate pricing ► Improved control over residents actually using garbage service ► Ability to set specifications on the size and quality of trucks used Ability to competitively bid service on a regular basis helping promote lower ! costs Can be used to generate revenues to support other services The primary potential advantages of organized collection are three-fold—lower prices,reduced truck traffic, and community control over decisions related to waste management. There are several factors involved in each of these three primary advantages. Greater efficiency, competitive bidding,rate increases structured into contracts, and variable rate pricing options can all result in more cost effective service provision. Fewer trucks stopping at every house results in less truck traffic at slower speeds. Public entities have responsibility and potential liability for proper solid waste management and organized collection provides better tools and control of decisions that affect solid waste management. The primary disadvantage is the loss of individual household control over the selection of a hauler and the associated direct relationship. Along with increased control for the public entity comes the requirement to provide the resources necessary to properly manage the decisions. i 6•Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc June 2009 4 Also, it may be more difficult for smaller haulers and entry level companies to break into and grow their business in organized collection systems. 2.2 Occurrence of Each Type of Collection System k Studies have been conducted to try and determine the prevalence of open collection systems and organized collection systems both locally and nationally. The following subsections present the findings from studies completed locally(in Minnesota), in Iowa, Colorado and one study completed across the United States and Canada. The findings show that there are variations in j the prevalence of types of collection systems. f 2.2.1 Minnesota 2.2.1.1 Eden Prairie j In 2005,the city of Eden Prairie compiled a report titled"Report on Residential Municipal Solid Waste Collection."' The report surveyed 108 cities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area and provided a breakdown of their garbage and recycling collection systems according to open and organized collection. The report noted that the most common system in these 108 communities is an open system(77 of the 108 cities had open collection systems, 71.3% of the communities). There were 29 cities with a contract for garbage collection and two (2) cities that collect municipally. j Of the 77 cities that had open garbage collection in this 2005 study, 22 cities have contracts for recycling collection. This leads to a percentage organized for recycling of 49.1%. j 2.2.1.2 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area A separate report titled"Comparative Economic Analysis of MSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area" completed in September, 19942 shows in Table II-3 that based on survey responses, there were 155 municipalities with open systems for MSW collection and 42 municipalities with organized collection of which three(3)were municipal collection. The percentages in this report indicated 78.7% open; 19.8% organized by contract; and 1.5% municipal collection arrangements at that time. i In the surveys completed as part of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area study,there were a total of I 58 cities with a breakdown of their systems reported. All the cities were over 10,000 in population in this study. Of the 58 cities that completed the survey, 37 were open for garbage collection. This represents 64% as open systems for garbage collection. Of these 37 cities with open garbage collection, 12 cities are organized for recycling collection or 21% of the total 58 4 cities. There were 21 cities with both garbage and recycling handled in organized systems. The total percentage of cities organized for recycling was 57%. Based on these studies, it appears that the breakdown of percentage of cities in Minnesota organized versus open may range as follows: 1 Barone,Michael.Dec.2005."Report on Residential Municipal Solid Waste Collection,"City of Eden Prairie,MN. 2"Comparative Economic Analysis of MSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area."Sept. 1994.GBB Solid Waste Mgmnt. Consultants.Falls Church,VA. R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Anangements.doo Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC•7 June 2009 f Recycling is stagnant or decreasing as economic incentives to recycle have diminished; e Resources that could be put to a higher use through recycling are disposed in processing facilities or landfills; I Key decisions are made with a focus on short-term cost or profits; Illegal dumping of wastes and associated environmental concerns continues in several areas; i Municipal concerns on truck traffic continue; Resource recovery costs are subsidized to compete with landfilling costs; and • Resource recovery capacity is not consistently utilized. Other counties such as Olmsted and Stearns have evaluated different organized collection approaches as a means to meet the goals of their Solid Waste Master Plans. Wabasha County completed the organized collection process and has an organized collection ordinance in place. E However, Wabasha County has not enforced the provisions of the ordinance due to voluntary agreements signed by the local waste haulers. I 2.4.2 Process There are some common characteristics in the processes used from municipality to municipality i as the process is fairly prescriptive in the Organized Collection statute. i i 2.4.2.1 Staff/Committee Considerations Typically, city staff work with a city established committee to review and research the various i issues. Often times, surveys of rates (monthly cost per household) are compiled. Potential advantages and disadvantages of open versus organized collection are identified and discussed for relevance to the community. The city of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection 15 had a particularly comprehensive listing of advantages and disadvantages for both open and organized collection as follows: "Potential Advantages of Open Collection Residents can select the hauler thatprovides the level ofservice most compatible with i their individual needs and can shop among the price options that are available. I Since Falcon Heights already has an open system, residents would not be inconvenienced � by change. i Administrative cost is minimized for the City. 15"Organized Collection Study—Final Report."Oct.2004.City of Falcon Heights,Minnesota R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Ar angenents.doc Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC•19 I June 2009 Small haulers will face no additional competitive challenges beyond what they face now within the industry. Potential Disadvantages of Open Collection Although choice is available, "inertia may be a compelling force"for a resident to stay with the hauler he/she has citing the GBB report.16 Residents must take the time and trouble to shop around for a better rate—which can be temporary and come with strings, long termm contracts, and cancellation penalties—or just give in and go along with higher prices or unsatisfactory service. Under an open system, costs must be spread over smaller and more uncertain customer base, so fees must be sufficiently high to cover fixed costs. In other words, we pay more. Operational cost savings of adding to the customer base are more likely to go to higher profits than to lowered prices for customers. It is impossible to determine whether Falcon Heights is in compliance with the Waste Management Act, which requires all residents in communities over S,000 people to use solid waste collection services. Individual residents and the community as a whole will have no leverage to support local businesses and keep them viable as the industry consolidates. . MSW trucks are heavy and have a demonstrated impact on street longevity. CioJ streets and alleys will continue to be subject to the impact of additional truck traffic. I Another consequence of overlapping routes and more trucks is more air pollution. and more noise. Residents do not have a choice about where their refuse goes. If they choose a hauler on the basis of where the hauler says the trash goes, there is no assurance that(a) the information is correct and(b) the hauler will not change practices in the future. I Major decisions that affect quality of life in Falcon Heights and the future of our environment will be driven by corporate priorities, not local interests. Potential Advantages of Organized Collection Lower consumer prices: Cities which have adopted organized collection have been able to negotiate lower rates for their residents. With a city contract, operational cost efficiencies can come back to residents in lower prices. . Garbage truck wear and tear does make a difference to our streets and roads. We can make our infrastructure last longer if we can reduce the number of trucks. t6"Comparative Economic Analysis of MSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area."Sept. 1994, GBB Solid Waste Mgmnt. Consultants.Falls Church,VA. 20•Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc June 2009 Rate increases will be structured and predictable.for the duration of the contract. Residents would have a clear, one-stop menu of services and costs and will not have to try to compare apples to oranges. Busy residents will save time and energy not having to shop around. A contract can specify where our refuse goes, whether to a landfill or for fuel processing. We can ensure this decision serves local interests and local environmental goals, not corporate priorities. Fewer trucks mean less noise and air pollution in our neighborhoods. Rates can be better structured to encourage reduction of waste, including the ability to offer pay-as-you-throw options for residents who produce a very low volume of trash. With a contract, the City could control the size and quality of trucks used, specifying lower pollution, better loading and weight bearing technology. Dependable Ciiy business can assure smaller haulers that a new truck for use in Falcon Heights is a good investment, helping to level the playing field. A city contract can enforce good service by building a schedule offines and escrow account into the contract. A contract can insist on a local phone number for service calls, answered by a local person. i i City would have a way of enforcing the Waste Management Act that requires residents of communities with over S,000 people to have garbage picked tip. There is noway under the present system. Although it would require a change in the City Code, an organized system could be structured so that different zones of the City could have their collection on different days, including Monday(which residents have asked for). The schedule could rotate every year or two, to give everyone a chance at that popular Monday collection. day. Potential Disadvantages of Organized Collection Although customers would have a choice of service levels, they would lose the choice of service provider. A major public education effort would be required to make everyone aware of the � changes, and the transition would be more difficultfor people who are uncomfortable with change. I Some residents may experience an increase in price over the artificially low rates offered by haulers campaigning against organized collection. R-Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC•21 June 2009 Residents will have to choose their services from the standard set offered. This may not include some services they receive now. There would be an increased administrative burden associated with getting a new system set up and running, including developing the RFP, evaluating pr°oposals, developing a contract agreement. The Cite would also have to monitor and enforce the terms of the contract. i Residents opposed to organized collection have been far more vocal than residents who support organized collection. Staff and elected officials are likely to experience negative feedback from. those individuals. In other cities, this has been temporary. Decreased business opportunities for haulers. " i 2.4.2.2 Hauler Participation The Organized Collection statute includes significant requirements to work with the existing haulers serving the city considering organizing. The haulers are obviously motivated to protect their interests as they participate in the process. They work to dissuade city officials from proceeding often tunes offering some alternatives that address some of the potential advantages of organized collection or disadvantages of open collection. i Hauling companies were extensively engaged in the Ramsey/Washington Counties Public Collection Study. Following are highlights from their input to that evaluation that are pertinent r for a statewide study.17 i Maintain competition—Small haulers believe they can compete in a number of ways in open systems that allow them to differentiate their service. Competitive measures include: ► Providing quality customer service; ► Niche marketing(providing specific, limited services and not trying to be "all things to all people"); ► Maintaining long-term customer relationships; and I ► Appealing to customer preferences for supporting locally-owned independent businesses. i Growth opportunities—Open systems allow haulers to pursue new customers and grow their business easier than bidding for contracts in organized systems. Company value—The value of a company is based upon annual revenues. If haulers lose customers due to a public entity organizing collection,their annual revenues will decline, decreasing the price received when selling. Some haulers use the proceeds from the sale of their company as their retirement fund. 17"Final Report: Study on Public Collection."Apr.2002.Ramsey&Washington Counties. St.Paul,MN. 22•Foth Infrastructure&Environment,LLC R-Analysis of Waste Collection service Arrangements.doc June 2009 e MCGRANN SHEA ANDERSON CARNIVAL STRAUGHN & LAMB, CHARTERED ATTORNEYS AT LAW U.S. BANCORP CENTER GREGORY P.GATTI WILLIAM R.McGRANN JENNIFER A.JAMESON _ ANDREW J.SHEA 800 NICOLLET MALL TIMOTHY J.FOSTER DAVID S.ANDERSON SUITE 2600 AMY L.COURT DOUGLAS M.CARNIVAL ROGER J.STELLJ ES ROBERT O.STRAUGHN MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA AMANDA R.CEFALU PETER L.COOPER 55402-7035 BEAN O.SKRYPEK KATHLEEN M.LAMB ALBERT E.LI JOHN R.SCHULZ TELEPHONE (612) 338-2525 COREY J.AYLING HENRY M.HELGEN 111 FACSIMILE (612)339-2386 RANDOLPH W. MORRIS SCOTT B.CROSSMAN CARLA J. PEDERSEN J une 8, 2005 j PAMELA HODGES NISSEN KATHLEEN MICHAELA BRENNAN JOSEPH T.BAGNOLI Dear Members of the Arden Hills Transportation Task Force: At the last task force meeting, Chair Jerry Garski asked the Haulers to return with a proposal that addresses a number of issues which might help reduce wear and tear on the streets of Arden Hills. In this letter, we have provided an explanation for how we plan to accomplish each of the objectives of the City. Attached to this letter is a draft I Memorandum of Understanding (MQU) which formalizes these objectives. The following is a list of items which the Haulers feel can be successfully accomplished. I These would be beneficial to the residents of Arden Hills and assist in reducing wear on the City's streets. It should be emphasized that the Haulers are eager to work with the City's staff, including the City Engineer, so that the removal of refuse from Arden Hills is !' done in a way that meets customer needs and preserves the streets. t4 The following are measures which the Haulers are prepared to take: ■ Structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with the poorer construction. Having seen the map provided by City staff of the condition of the streets in Arden Hills,the Haulers are now in the process of replanning their routes so as to achieve this goal. They are eager to continue discussions with the City Engineer so that their trucks are the lightest when they pick up trash on the streets with the poorest construction. Changes in the routing system will be achieved through each company's individual efforts, thereby protecting the City's streets to the greatest extent possible. Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. Since Haulers have routing systems which include numerous communities, it is impossible to come into every community with empty trucks. As a result, Haulers will make their best efforts to ensure that their trucks will have as small a volume of waste within them when they begin their routes within the C I Arden Hills Transportation Task Force June 8, 2005 Page 2 . City of Arden Hills. This, coupled with beginning those routes on streets which are currently in the poorest condition, will help reduce wear on Arden Hill's streets. • By October 31, 2005, the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks when Picking up throughout the City. I The practice will help reduce wear on streets by distributing loads over more axles. By the end of October, all Haulers will have acquired all the necessary equipment to complete the conversion to all tandem fleets. • The Haulers will assist the City by alerting the City staff to unlicensed Haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. The City's interest in this regard is identical to the Haulers'. Any company f which is picking up residential trash within the City limits without a license is unfairly competing and violating City ordinances. The Haulers, like the City, support the enforcement of the law in a way that recognizes that those who have sought licenses and complied by City ordinances should be the only Haulers entitled to do business within the City limits. E The Haulers will furnish the City with a list of telephone numbers (updated • on a regular basis)to be used for complaints. Since customer service is the most important part of Haulers' business, the Haulers are eager to know of any complaints which their customers may have. As a result, they welcome contact by the City staff should one of their customers lodge a complaint with the City. They will provide City staff with a telephone contact list which they will keep on an updated basis to ensure that communication between the City,the Haulers,and their customers is as easy and prompt as possible. . By October 31, 2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number of the Hauler. Again, the Haulers, like the City, feel that this is an important way by which customers and the City know who is hauling waste within the City's limits. All containers which have obsolete markings will be either removed or remarked with the appropriate information_ This process obviously cannot occur overnight and the Haulers expect the conversion to be complete by this coming October. • The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. Currently all Haulers in Arden Hills, and throughout the state, provide each of their customers with volume-based pricing. There are typically three levels of service based on container size. The prices vary based upon competition and the fixed costs each Hauler has in performing its service. I Arden Hills Transportation Task Force June 8, 2005 Page 3 ■ Haulers will assist their customers in disposing of larger items like refrigerators,water heaters and appliances. , All Haulers currently offer their customers an opportunity to dispose of these items. Some Haulers pick up and dispose of these items themselves,while others make arrangements through specialized carriers_ Obviously, these additional services require additional reimbursement to the Haulers. Each Hauler will make arrangements with its own customers with respect to handling of these articles. The Haulers appreciate the work that the Transportation Task Force has performed and its willingness to work with the Haulers to reach a sensible and appropriate set of ideas which will benefit the City of Arden Hills and its residents, while at the same time permitting those citizens to choose their waste hauling services based upon preferences and needs in a competitive and open environment. We look forward to implementing these innovations and continuing the excellent hauling services which the City of Arden Hills has enjoyed to date. E 1 Sinc r Douglas M. Carnival, Legal Cou sel National Solid Wastes Management Association I Attachment i I 207009.00C Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Arden Hills and Licensed Residential Solid Waste Maulers This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into on the day of -1 2005 between the City of Arden Hills (City) and the undersigned Licensed Residential Waste Haulers (Haulers). Haulers shall abide by the following provisions: 1. The Haulers will structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with poorer construction. j 2. The Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. 3. By October 31, 2005, the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks throughout the city. { 4. The Haulers will assist the city by alerting the city staff to unlicensed haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. i 5. The Haulers will furnish the city with a list of telephone numbers (updated on a regular basis)to be used for complaints. I 6. By October 31, 2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number of the Hauler. 7. The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. 8. The Haulers will assist their customers in disposing of larger items j like refrigerators, water heaters and appliances. I I The City and the Haulers,will meet on an annual basis, or sooner if needed, to discuss any issues that may arise regarding the aforesaid commitments to ensure that all parties are satisfied that efforts are being made to abide by the commitments and remedy any problems that may arise. I i City of Arden Hills Signed: Mayor Date: I i Attest: City Administrator Date: BFI Waste Services Signed: E i Date: i Ace Solid Waste, Inc. Signed: Date: i Walter's Recycling and Refuse Signed: Date: I Waste Management of MN, Inc. Signed: I Date: i I I 207013.DOC I 2 6126105 Memorandum of Understanding Between the City'of Arden Dills and Licensed Residential Solid Waste Haulers i This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into on the day of , 2005 between the City of Arden Hills (City) and the undersigned Licensed Residential'Waste Haulers (Haulers). Haulers shall abide by the following provisions: 1. The Haulers will structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with poorer construction. 2. The Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. i 3. By October 31,2005,the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks throughout the city. 4. The Haulers will assist the city by alerting the city staff to unlicensed haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. 5. The Haulers will furnish the city with a list of telephone numbers (updated on a regular basis)to be used for complaints. 6. By October 31, 2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number of the Hauler. 7. The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. 8, The Haulers will assist their customers in disposing of larger items like refrigerators,water heaters and appliances. i 9. The Haulers will offer their customers the option to temporarily suspend service during exteaded absences from home. 10. The Haulers will begin their hauling routes in Arden Hills at times that comply with city ordinances. j The City and the Haulers will meet on an annual basis,or sooner if needed, to discuss any issues that may arise regarding the aforesaid commitments to ensure that all parties are satisfied that efforts are being made to abide by the commitments and remedy any problems that may arise. I City of Arden Hills Signed! Mayor I Date: Attest: City Administrator Date: I BFI Waste Services Signed: Date: i Ace Solid Waste, Inc. Signed: Date: Walter's Recycling and Refuse Signed: Date. Waste Management of MN,Inc. Signed: Date: i i i I I 207Q13.DOC I I 2 #5A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item RETREAT .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Renewable Energy Implementation Plan Meeting Date: February 24, 2017 Prepared by: Paul Hornby Reviewed by: Attachments: Renewable Energy Implementation Plan, Renewable Energy Analysis Priorities Summary Policy Consideration: Should the City Council Implement renewable energy strategies identified in Renewable Energy Analysis prepared by the Great Plains Institute? Background: The City Council authorized preparation of a citywide Renewable Energy Analysis to better understand the potential for renewable energy resources and opportunities for city operations, residents, and businesses. Council directed staff to prepare a Renewable Energy Implementation Plan to organize recommendations in the Renewable Energy Analysis for planning and financing energy goals. The plan identifies implementation of specific item to be addressed between 2017 and 2020, with longer term items from 2021 and beyond that can be reviewed and considered for implementation by Council and staff at that time. The Implementation Plan spreadsheet includes the proposed implementation steps by year along with future items for consideration. The Renewable Energy Implementation Plan is prepared in a format for use in the City Capital Improvement Program and Comprehensive Plan. Financial or Budget Considerations: The majority of the items identified in the implementation plan are related to City staff time. Installation of solar panels on roof tops or other locations are projected to have cost associated with them. These installations are projected beyond 2020, but Table 1.2 provides budgetary costs for 2017. There are also costs associated with energy audits, proposed for 2017, at about$600 per building. Energy improvement costs post audit will need to be determined after the audit report is available. Plan years 2018, 2019 and 2020 include a placeholder for improvements recommended by the audits. Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends Council accept the Renewable Energy Implementation Plan, consider the plan during the Council staff retreat, or provide staff other direction. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Pagel Renewable Energy Implementation Plan Prepared for: City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 February 13, 2017 Prepared by: WSB & Associates, Inc. 477 Temperance Street St. Paul, MN 55101 651-286-8450 (Tel) 651-286-8488 (Fax) Renewable Energy Implementation Plan City of Shorewood,MN WSB Project No.2925-28 February 13, 2017 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Renewable Energy Implementation Plan City of Shorewood, MN WSB Project No. 2925-28 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Transmitted herewith is the Renewable Energy Implementation Plan for the above-referenced project. The report is a planning tool to help the City meet its short-term and long-term renewable energy needs. We would be happy to discuss this report with you at your convenience. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB&Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, P.E. City Engineer (651) 286-8453 phornby @wsbeng.com ph INTRODUCTION In February, the City had a Renewable Energy Analysis conducted to better understand its renewable energy resources and opportunities to utilize clean energy for city operations, residents, and businesses. The Renewable Energy Implementation Plan seeks to organize and layout the ideas set forth from the Renewable Energy Analysis to use as a tool as the City moves forward to achieve its energy goals. The following priorities were set forth by the City following its review of the Renewable Energy Analysis; • Investigate on-site solar energy installation on public buildings • Prioritize potential community solar garden sites on public land • Enable solar development and energy efficiency development through city policy and regulatory tools • Promote existing utility incentive programs and continue to work with energy utilities to encourage residents and businesses to participate • Prepare educational opportunities for residents and businesses on Green House Gas (GHG) reduction measures • Identify fleet maintenance, purchases, and fuel conversion opportunities • Improve efficiency of city buildings • Implement measures to improve energy use for critical infrastructure with high energy intensity • Amend joint powers agreement for police/fire station to accommodate renewable energy and energy efficiency measures • Revisit technologies that will reduce GHG emissions for city facilities (20 years out) and incorporate as they become available Each of these priorities was then further broken down into short and long-term actions. The attached table gives a chronological breakdown of when the City would be looking to initiate each action and a rough estimate of what resources might be involved in accomplishing it. Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy is a two-year community support program that facilitates community energy planning and implementation support for targeted, community-specific energy goals. The first 4-6 months partners a team of local community stakeholders assisted by Xcel Energy experts, through a series of five workshops, and using baseline information and existing energy-saving efforts, to plan and develop a strategic energy action plan. The remaining 18-20 months are used to implement the goals and strategies developed in the plan. The City could benefit by encouraging the increased use of solar energy installations by City policy. This can be done both by removing existing barriers or hindrances such as modifying the City's zoning code to specifically include solar energy installations as permitted uses that would more stream line the permitting process and by adding incentives either through supplementing construction/project costs or through in expedited or discounted permitting process. Educating residents and businesses to decrease energy consumption, increase use of renewable energy, and reduce greenhouse (GHG) emissions. This would include the awareness of water use, and encouraging residents to employee conservation methods like, minimizing the time water is left Renewable Energy Implementation Plan City of Shorewood,MN WSB Project No.2925-28 running during activities, installing reduced flow faucets and shower heads, and limiting irrigation during summer months. A Solar Power Hour is a one-hour presentation which, discusses solar market trends, describes the basic components of a solar photovoltaic (PV) system, outlines the evaluation process for installing solar PV, and introduces incentive options and economic benefits. The Home Energy Squad offers an in home meeting where, for a flat $70 trip charge, efficiency experts will identify and install for free energy-saving home improvements which include, compact fluorescent lights, programmable thermostats, weather stripping for an exterior door, high efficiency shower heads, kitchen and bathroom faucet aerators, and water heater insulation. The Clean Energy Project Builder is a web site resource that lists companies that plan, implement, and manage clean energy projects within a given area. Residents and businesses are able to be connected with service providers in their area as well as review their past projects. By utilizing light emitting diodes (LEDs) which, use about 75-80%less energy than traditional incandescent light bulbs and can last up to 25 times longer, the City could save on energy costs. Other building efficiencies include daylight controllers which turn certain lights off when they detect that natural light is providing a predetermined level of brightness and infrared sensors which, detect movement and occupancy within a room and turn the lights off after a given period of time without occupancy. As part of Xcel Energy's Turn Key Service Program, for a$600 fee, an energy advisor will conduct an ASHRAE level 1 Energy Efficiency Audit on City-owned buildings to identify improvements which provide the largest impact to reduce energy costs utilizing low or no-cost measures. This assessment also provides for a comprehensive energy report which includes, improvements recommended for your facility, potential energy savings, outline of simple paybacks, listing of available rebates, benchmarking for applicable building segments and an end-use profile to determine what's consuming the most energy. The report may also identify more capital intensive improvements that would require additional analysis found in Level 2 Audits including; combustion analysis and steady state efficiency testing, lighting level assessment, blower door testing, duct leakage testing, relative humidity testing, air flow and temperature measurements, water flow and temperature measurements, and electrical testing which, would have additional costs. Also, as part of the assessment, Xcel offers a 30% bonus to rebate-eligible improvements that are implemented within 9-12 months of the assessment. Another feature of the Turn Key Service Program are no-cost services for energy efficiency project implementation. These include; facilitating meetings;prioritizing conservation opportunities and provide further evaluation; conducting a financial analysis; evaluating proposals and coordinating/verifying project implementation; and completing and submitting rebate paperwork. Community Solar Gardens are where organizations or individuals can subscribe to purchase a share of the energy produced by an existing or proposed solar garden. That portion of energy produced is then credited to the organization's or individual's energy bill. Local governments also have the option of participating by providing or leasing roof top or land space for community solar garden projects. One of the resources to assist in this process are the Clean Energy Resource Teams Renewable Energy Implementation Plan City of Shorewood,MN WSB Project No.2925-28 (CERT) which are a statewide partnership that connects individuals and their communities to the resources they need to identify and implement community-based clean energy projects. At this time, when considering replacing fleet vehicles and trying to consider fuel efficiency, the methods utilized by the state and surrounding government agencies to reduce fuel costs include the use of ethanol, biodiesel, and Eco boost technologies in their fleets. There are currently no options available for electrical hybrid versions of fleet trucks however; they are anticipated to become more widely available in the next 3-5 years. Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary challenge, assistance and recognition program to help cities achieve their sustainability and quality-of-life goals. This free continuous improvement program, managed by a public-private partnership, is based upon 29 best practices. Each best practice can be implemented by completing one or more actions at a 1, 2 or 3-star level. These actions focus on cost savings and energy use reduction. Cities achieve steps based on the number and level of which they implement the GreenStep 29 best practices. The League of Minnesota Cities formally recognizes new and continuing Green Step cities at their annual conference. There are green building standards that have been established in Minnesota through the Minnesota Sustainable Building 2030 Energy Conservation Program. The program sets specific performance standards for energy use improvements in newly constructed and remodeled buildings compared to representative buildings in 2003. The goal of the program is to gradually reduce the required carbon emissions every 5 years until the requirements for new construction in 2030 are a 100% reduction. Following construction, actual energy data and use is collected and program participants would be eligible to receive specific utility incentives. Water and wastewater make up a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions from the city's operations. Supplying homes and businesses with clean water and safely removing waste water are crucial functions of a local government. While these functions (particularly pumping water) have high energy intensity, it is critical to sustain their operation at all times. Replacing pumping equipment with higher efficiency alternatives will save the City money in reduced energy use over time while the implementation of on-site solar arrays paired with batteries would provide both supplemental power sources and a back-up power supply if necessary. Renewable Energy Implementation Plan City of Shorewood,MN WSB Project No.2925-28 TABLE 1.1 Shorewood Renewable Energy Implementation Plan Timeframe Action Type Priority Action Description Resources Needed Participate in Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy program and develop an energy action plan to meet the City's energy objectives. Public Make information available on the city website,include rebate materials in information kiosks,the city Education/ newsletter,social media,and any other city community communications. Public Sponsor or promote educational events and workshops like a Solar Power Hour,news articles,website links. In-House Staff Time Information/ Promote home efficiency programs like the Home Energy Squad. Community Involvement Link residents and businesses to resources like the Clean Energy Project Builder that identifies contractors and installers for renewable energy projects. Educate residents on water consumption habits in an effort to reduce water use,especially in summer months. Include solar energy as a permitted use in the zoning code for rooftop and free-standing accessory systems. Address dimensional standards as described in the Shorewood Renewable Energy Analysis Report. Encourage solar installations(on residential and commercial properties)through promotion of utility provider incentives,streamlining the permitting process,and highlighting its benefits. In-House$10,00 consulting $10,000 consulting Planing/Zoning Require energy efficiency for renewable energy projects,such as the recommendations provided for the PU D Ordinance ordinance.(e.g.Energy efficient light bulbs,occupancy controlled light switches,Low flow faucets,Low flow Updates toilets,Motion sensored faucets,High efficency HVAC systems) 2017 Set renewable energy and energy reduction goals for the public and private sector to determine the amount of energy to be offset by solar energy and energy efficiency.(Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy program) In-House Staff Time For,cc'ations lude a map of the city's solar resource in the comprehensive plan;identify land use conflicts and priority for solar development. Replace all Incandescent Lighting in City Buildings with LED Lighting or comparably efficient units. (75-80% Energy Cost Savings for LEDs compared to traditional Incandescents) In-House Staff Time and Improve Material cost Install daylight controllers and Infrared Sensors for interior lighting systems Effiiciency of City Buildings Schedule Energy Efficiency Audit through XCEL Energy-City Hall,Maintenance Facility,Southshore Center,Well In-House Staff Time.$600 per Houses,Lift Stations,JPA w/Police Station and Fire Station) building for Audit Short Term Participate in joint power actions with a Community Solar Garden Program. (0-4 Years) Fleet Adopt a purchasing policy that considers fuel efficiency and alternative fuels(e.g.bio-diesel,ethanol,turbo) Maintenance when replacing fleet vehicles. and Purchases Create Community Establish a Vision and mission statement for the community through goal setting as part of the Xcel Energy In-House Staff Time Vision/Mission Partners in Energy Program. Statement On-Site Solar Promote the community solar garden program to residents and businesses by providing resources through Installations various communication outlets,regardless of participation. Improved City Building Implement Energy Efficiency Audit through XCEL Energy-Phase 1-Identify Energy-Saving Oppurtunities Efficiencies Planing/Zoning Ordinance Implement required number of energy efficiency best practices to achieve Step 2 GreenStep City status. Updates 2018 In-House Staff Time Public Education/ IPublic Implement the ener gy action plan developed in the Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy program nformation/ Community Involvement Improved City 2019 Building Implement Energy Efficiency Audit through XCEL Energy-Phase 2-Scope Energy Efficiency Potential In-House Staff Time Efficiencies Improved City 72020 Building Implement Energy Efficiency Audit through XCEL Energy-Phase 3-Implement Energy Efficiency Improvements In-House Staff Time Efficiencies Consider a pilot behind-the-meter solar installation on its Public Works facilities,City Hall or the Southshore Ins Site Solar Center. See Table 1.2 Installations Mid-Range 2021-2027 Plan for solar installations on facilities where there is a solar resource and energy usage. (5-10 Years) Planing/Zoning Encourage new construction to be built to green building standards(e.g.SB 2030)if allowed as appendix to the Ordinance State Building Code,or coupled with PUD regulations. In-House Staff Time Updates Consider options to replace pumping equipment with higher efficiency options. =Longe 2028+ Improved In-House Staff Time Energy Use Install ground-mount solar systems at water pumping stations. O o m O O O N 7 m r14 On O Ln m O N W m ^ I, Ln N } = O O rl - O N N N U Ln O 3 � O. N r m � O w W .0 r , Ln ci ci Lfl � Ol li O N Ol ci 00 l0 00 y N N N m - Ol I� W N O O •C� N C � N -O O O O On Ln i w O O N N +' O -:1- O 0 O O C 7 W n U i � O^ cN-I am-I s � m O Ol L U m 7 Lf1 O m (A r, Ln VI, V). w O -1 oo O m of I, N O N N V O � _ O Ol O dA m E CJ O V U Ln m Ln 00 _ �n i U O N O y fC y U 4 O M W N � y C C O OC fC " bA O 16 r L 'a N Q E LZ m 0 c s s o V +, +, i o c 3 3 O o O 16 16 m O O bA m T U U w C W O O +. N m U N N 0 41 M Q Q Q U N V tlba ` 3 U U H U M r-I J Q £ W m W W W Wi ++ H ++ ++ ++ J C C O. 16 i 16 16 16 m +�+ 5 :5 E W E E E W C d m m (A I W :)I W I W I W This winter our community begins a collaboration with Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy to develop and implement an energy action plan for our city. Energy Planning in Shorewood The City of Shorewood is kicking off 2017 with a new emphasis on energy planning. Beginning in February, a team of community stakeholders will attend a series of workshops to develop an energy action plan for our city. P The planning process will set goals, prioritize energy initiatives, and outline strategies that align with Shorewood's interests and values. This planning process is made possible through Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy offering. Last fall Shorewood applied to participate and was the tenth community selected in Minnesota since 2014. What is rs in ner ? Xcel Energy's Partners in Energy is an offering available to communities in Minnesota and Colorado that are interested in energy planning resources. Through a two-year commitment, Xcel Energy will help Shorewood identify energy objectives, develop a plan and implement strategies that incorporate the city's unique, local resources. To facilitate and empower the City, Xcel Energy assembled a team of experts in energy consulting, process and implementation coaching to assist. Where can I learn ore? rr � r � ® For more information please contact Julie Moore, Shorewood s Communications and Recycling Coordinator at 952.960.7906 or JMoore @ci.shorewood.mn.us. IN I fr City o f Xcel Energy° Shorewood Ion An Xcel Energy Community Collaboration III In , 11iii III,MIIIIIVIII 1111111111 1 Im,�,, ,,,,,,,i11111,1 09111VIII mill 1,i,ai iMi,