Loading...
111008 CC WS MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2008 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SOUTHSHORE CENTER 6:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:05 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Counciimembers Bailey, Turgeon, Wellens and Woodruff; City Administrator Heck; Finance Director Burton; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Also present: Councilmember Elect Zerby Absent: None B. Review Agenda Wellens moved, Bailey seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. ENTERPRISE BUDGET DISCUSSION Director Burton stated Council had been provided with the next draft of the 2009 budgets for the City's Enterprise Funds. The budgets have been revised to include the changes requested by Council during its October 13, 2008, work-session. Burton reviewed the changes that were made to the Water Budget. The debt service transfer from the Water Operating Fund to the Water Debt Service Fund was reduced from $350,000 to $260,000. The 2008 capital budget was revised upward to reflect an additional $108,000 required for the SE Water Tower rehabilitation Project, as per the bid. She noted in the next budget revision the cost for that project will again be increased to $457,000 from $378,000 because of engineering costs. She stated Water Operations salaries were reduced approximately $15,000 to reflect the change in Utility Maintenance personnel time; fewer hours will be spent reading water meters and more time will be dedicated to checking Storm water structures. Burton distributed some excerpts from a North Central Utility Rate Survey. She stated for the water rates in the Minneapolis / St. Paul Metro Area she explained the City's water rate was on the higher end. She also distributed a graphical comparison of the existing rate structure, a rate structure proposed by Councilmember Wellens, and third rate structure. She explained Wellens' proposed structure is programmed to reward water conservation and it would adjust minimum rates. The City's current rate for consumption up to 22,500 gallons per quarter is $71.88 (or $23.96 for 7,500 gallons per month). Wellens proposed minimum rate (Option A) would be $25.83 per month or $77.50 per quarter. The third minimum rate (Option B) would be $22.50 per month or $67.50 per quarter. She stated rather than adjusting the rates at this time she recommended the City wait until it can conduct a comprehensive rate study with 5 - 10 year projections starting in April 2009 and then implement a rate change. As part of CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 2 of 7 that study, proposed CIP expenditures and operating expenditures would be reviewed in great detail. Some of the study work could be done by staff and there are firms that do utility rate studies. Councilmember Woodruff stated based on the water rate chart distributed it appears that many of the cities on the chart have a much lower base rate than the City. He understood Councilmember Wellens' proposal would reduce the base rate and increase the incremental consumption rates. It appears Wellens' proposal would be very close to revenue neutral. Woodruff suggested the base rate be lowered the beginning of 2009 and the variable rates be adjusted upward. He nominated Councilmember Wellens to write an article for publication in the Shore Report explaining the rationale for rate changes. Councilmember Turgeon asked for clarification of which proposed rate structure would be implemented; Option A or Option B. Councilmember Bailey questioned what information indicated a rate change would be revenue neutral. He did not draw that conclusion from the three rate-comparison charts. Director Burton stated on an average most of the residents consume about 30,000 gallons of water per quarter, noting there were very high water consumers during the summer months. Councilmember Woodruff retracted his recommendation to implement a rate change effective January IS` because a thorough consumption analysis was desirable. Mayor Lizee suggested the study be done before the rates are changed. She would prefer a comparison of cities comparable to the City. The survey compares cities of very different population sizes. Councilmember Turgeon stated the comparison should not be based on population size alone as many cities have city-wide water and the City does not. Director Burton stated it would be beneficial to use actual consumption records, preferably after all the radio-read meters have been installed, in a thorough study and gather approximately one year's worth of data. Administrator Heck stated the key to doing a meaningful study is to use accurate consumption data. He commented that on the rate survey two of the cities purchase water from Minneapolis and three of the cities are part of the St. Paul Regional Water Service. The survey is a good tool but it does not indicate what the City's rate should be. Director Brown stated the survey points out that there is a need for a rate study. Councilmember Woodruff stated the rate survey provided interesting information, but it wasn't really relative to what the City's rates should be. There was consensus to leave the water rates as they are and conduct a comprehensive rate study with a forecast period of 5 - 10 years in the spring of 2009. Councilmember Elect Zerby questioned if the City was fined if it drained the aquifer by a certain amount. Director Brown explained the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regulates the well appropriate permit. The City was traditionally fined for pumping more water than allowed by the permit. Zerby questioned if that shouldn't be factored into the study; maybe residents should share some of that financial burden. Brown stated based on work done by Engineer Landini the DNR has adjusted the City's permitted volume upward for the next ten years, and hopefully the City will no longer exceed its permitted amount. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 3 of 7 Councilmember Bailey stated he understood Director Burton to state the rate study would be done for all utilities. He then stated Councilmember Wellens had identified that the City overcharges residents who consume a small amount of water. He did not recommend that continue until a comprehensive study was completed. The study of all utility rates could take a number of months. He thought it would be relatively easy to develop a spread sheet to analyze volume users and rate change scenarios that would keep water revemies revenue neutral. He understood that the comprehensive study would also address long-term capital needs for maintaining and repairing the infrastructure. He wanted to see a consumption analysis progress more rapidly so rate changes can be implemented sooner to benefit minimal consumers. Councilmember Turgeon stated she would like to implement the low consumer water rate changes effective January 1, 2009. Director Burton explained the rate change would apply to the first quarterly billing in 2009 (March 30`x'); therefore, even if the interim rate change was not presented to Council until January 2009 it could still be in effect for the first billing. Director Burton recapped that a comprehensive rate study will be done for all utilities in the spring of 2009 and a consumption analysis will be done for an interim rate change and presented to Council for consideration sometime in January 2009. The comprehensive study will consider what the long-term capital needs are for the infrastructures. Director Burton stated based on a question in an email from Councilmember Woodruff she stated Water Operations Charges for Service revenues could be decreased to $660,000 from $707,000 in the next revision. Woodruff stated based on the run-rate today the revenues would be significantly less than $707,000; he would be comfortable reducing the $707,000 amount. Burton stated after adjusting the water operations budget to reflect the most increase in cost for the SE Area Water Tower rehabilitation and the current cost for the Amesbury Well Controls Replacement Projects, the 2009 year-end cash balance should be approximately $2.57 million. Director Brown explained when the costs were reviewed for the SE Area Water Tower Rehabilitation Project Staff was focused on the increase in construction costs. There were also some internal costs that were incurred; Public Works had to construct a gravel pad next to the water tower next to the equipment. There were also engineering costs incurred during construction. When all costs were looked at collectively the cost of the project increased again by $79,000. He also explained the $55,000 budgeted cost for the Amesbury Wells Controls Replacement Project is an old number (5 - 6 years old). Council awarded the design and build for that project at $130,000 and that will be adjusted in the next revision. He noted even with those increases the Water Operations Fund will have a healthy balance. There was consensus to reduce the Water Operations Charges for Services revenues to $670,000. Director Burton noted this is the last time Council would review the 2009 Enterprise Budgets before the December 1, 2008, Truth-In-Taxation public hearing with subsequent adoption at the December 8, 2008, Council meeting. Director Burton recapped that the Amesbury Well Controls Replacement Project cost will be increased to approximately $145,000 and the SE Area Water Tower Rehabilitation Project cost will be increased to $457,000. Director Brown stated KLM engineering costs are included in the SE Area Water Tower costs; KLM helps with the design and inspection. Councilmember Turgeon expressed concern that the SE Area Water Tower Project cost started at approximately $250,000 and now the cost is up to $457,000. Director Brown questioned what Turgeon would have had him change. Councilmember Bailey stated the change in cost was very substantial, and if CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 4 of 7 project estimates were to increase that substantially he wasn't sure of what value the budget projections had. Director Brown stated is relatively easy to accurately estimate a water main installation. Because there is so little experience with estimating a water tower rehabilitation project and because that's a complex activity, it is difficult to estimate the cost. He noted that most project estimates have been reasonable. He explained each contractor looks at a water tower site differently; therefore, it is difficult to use a standard water tower bidding sheet. During the design process it was determined that part of the water tower structure did not comply with OSHA requirements. That would not have been known until the design process was started. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Brown stated if the project had been let 1 - 2 months earlier, there may have been a slight reduction in cost. Councilmember Woodruff suggested for future projects Staff conduct a thorough assessment of costs to date part way through the project and project what the total project cost will be. He then stated for the SE Area Water Tower Project Council was provided with a $108,000 increase and now has been informed of another increase. He wanted to hear all of the bad news at the same time. Director Brown stated there was a sense of urgency to complete the project this year. Had a more thorough study of the tower been done, which would have taken more time, there may have been a better estimate. Staff would have preferred to have had that additional time. In the future, he will advise Council when Staff needs more time to conduct the study and prepare the estimate even though Council does not always like to hear that information. There was Council consensus that it would prefer to hear that information than have less than quality estimates. There was ensuing discussion about real and perceived delays in the project and what the impact they and the sense of urgency to complete the project had on the cost estimate. Councilmember Woodruff stated he wanted Staff to project realistic cost projections and identify potential risks. Director Burton stated no changes were recommended to the Sanitary Sewer budget at the last work session. She noted there was discussion about the Sanitary Sewer cash reserves. Tlie reserves are typically used for infrastructure replacement, capital improvements, emergency damages, I & I mitigation, and working capital. Staff suggests designating $2.5 million of the available $4 million fund balance for these purposes. The remaining fund balance (approximately $1.5 million) would then be available for other uses, such as internal loans to other funds for specific purposes like the Lake Mary Outlet Project. She noted the Sanitary Sewer Fund pro forma does not include the $300,000 loan for the Lake Mary Outlet Project. If that were included the estimated 2009 Sanitary Sewer year-end fund balance would be reduced to approximately $4.1 million. Councilmember Woodruff stated he had suggested Council consider reducing the sanitary sewer rates and increasing the storm water rates such that it would be revenue neutral to residents. The Sanitary Sewer Fund reserves would go down and the Storm water Fund reserves would be increased. Director Burton explained each Enterprise Fund must stand on its own. The 2009 comprehensive rate study will help to determine what the appropriate utility rates should be. The current Sanitary Sewer rates appear to be appropriate because the year-end cash balance is relatively consistent. She noted MCES increases the City's rate annually and the City has no control over that increase. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 5 of 7 Councilmember Woodruff stated he did not have an issue with waiting to change the sanitary sewer rates until the rate study was done. He thought the Sanitary Sewer Fund balance was well in excess of what is needed. If residents were charged less than the current sanitary sewer rate the reserves would be reduced and another utility could have a rate increase to help build those reserves. Councilmember Bailey commented that all residents pay sanitary sewer and storm water utility costs. Director Burton noted the City's sanitary sewer rate is in the top third on the North Central Utility Rate Survey when compared to metro cities and it is on the low side when compared to non-metro cities. Councilmember Turgeon stated when the storm water rate was increased to $15 from $5 a few years ago residents reacted to that increase. In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Burton explained some cities have a volume rate for sanitary sewer but a city has to have city-wide water to do that. The sanitary rate is based on the water consumption rate. In response to a question from Councilmember Elect Zerby, Director Burton explained the gallons of flow amount in the budget was for the period July 1 to June 30 each year. That information is provided by the Metropolitan Council. I & I is also included in the flow and that fluctuates based on rainfall and snowfall during that period. Director Brown stated Staff has prepared a request for proposal (RFP) for services to assess the City's I & I. Director Burton stated no changes were recommended to the Recycling budget at the last work session. Councilmember Woodruff stated it appears the tonnage of recycling collected is trending downward. He suggested the City promote recycling to try and increase participation. Councilmember Elect Zerby stated Eden Prairie has implemented a program called Recycle Bank where residents get points based on volume collected from them. Councilmember Turgeon stated the costs were higher to do that, and she suggested as part of the spring clean-up program the City consider offering ashred-it program. Mayor Lizee stated the City should consider different programs to increase participation. Approximately 39 percent of the City participates in the recycling program. The tonnage collected has decreased 24 percent. There could be a number of factors that caused that reduction including people getting less printed materials. Director Burton reviewed the changes that were made to the Storm Water Management Budget. It was decided it was not necessary to spend the 2008 planned capital outlay of $100.000. The result being an increase of the fund balance for 2009 projects. A $300,000 internal loan from the Sewer Fund to the Storm water Fund is contemplated in this budget draft to help fiu~d the 2009 Lake Mary Outlet Project (a cost of $457,000) and the Harding Lane Drainage Project ($97,000). A corresponding debt service component ($65,000) is included for 2009. Salaries were increased to reflect the change in Utility Maintenance personnel time: more time will be dedicated to checking Storm water structures. No rate changes are contemplated for the Storm Water Fund in this budget draft. Director Brown noted the estimates for the Harding Lake Project are very high level; there has been no design work done for that project. He stated that traditional 30 percent of a roadway project cost is related to storm sewer, and that is what this estimate is based on. He also noted a feasibility study has bee done for the Lake Mary Outlet Project, although it is somewhat dated. Burton stated Staff has discussed different options for finding the Lake Mary Outlet Project including special taxing districts and internal loans from the Sewer Fund and/or from the Liquor Fund. This project is a major, one time capital expense. At the last work session Staff noted some Council reluctance to CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 6 of 7 using special taxing district(s) as a financing tool; perhaps believing it might be contentious. Staff researched the process required to establish a special taxing district. Included in the meeting pack is an excerpt from the Minnesota Statutes describing requirements to establish a taxing district. The ordinance to establish a district must be adopted by atwo-thirds vote; a public hearing must be held after publishing for two successive weeks; and when adopted, the ordinance must be filed with the county auditor and county recorder. Before a contract for a project is awarded, the publications and public hearing process must be repeated. The process must be repeated for each project. Director Brown stated there are 40-42 homes that are tributary to the Lake Mary drainage area and approximately 6 homes are in danger of flooding. Councilmember Wellens expressed concern about having the entire City pay for something that is of benefit a few homes. He questioned when the City should no longer consider those types of projects. Councilmember Turgeon noted there are a few upcoming projects that are like that. Mayor Lizee stated these projects have not come to the attention of the City because of one homeowner. Councilmember Woodruff questioned if it is worth paying approximately $100,000 per affected home to mitigate a problem regardless of where the funding comes from. Wellens stated the homeowner should have known about potential storm water issue when they bought the property. Councilmember Bailey questioned if Council would agree to the project if the cost was $1 million or $2 million. Director Brown stated the City could let the property flood and let the homeowner deal with it. The City could take some interim steps to mitigate the problem (i.e., pump that drainage area). The City could also acquire the properties. With regard to the Lake Mary Outlet, 5 - 6 years ago efforts were made to try and retain water there; the silt on the bottom has gotten so think water doesn't flow out easily now. Performing the project would set a precedent. There is the same issue in the Boulder Bridge area. He noted the City has pumped the outlet three times so far. Councilmember Turgeon suggested Council be provided with history on the Lake Mary area, noting Lake Mary is not a lake. Councilmember Woodruff stated the task at hand is agreeing to a budget, not authorizing a project. He suggested the history for a project be discussed before a decision is made to move forward with that project. He is comfortable with budgeting for a loan as a funding option at this point; whether or not the loan is actually taken is another discussion. There was consensus to include the $300,000 loan in the budget. Director Burton stated the City's storm water rates are on the high side based on the North Central Utility Rate Survey. She noted she had called some neighboring cities regarding their rates and she distributed her findings to Council. Burton stated the Liquor Fund balance was approximately $924,000 at September month-end. In response to a comment from Councilmember Turgeon, Burton stated she could create a pro forma for the Liquor Fund. Burton noted the 2009 General Fund budget will be discussed at the Novemmber 24, 2008, Council work session. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES November 10, 2008 Page 7 of 7 3. ADJOURN Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of November 10, 2008, at 6:58 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: f~ Brian Hc~ ,City Administrator/Clerk ..,--~ `~~ , , ~ ~ 1 Christine Lizee, Mayor