2025-01-22 WS & CC Meeting Minutes - (Approved)

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville City Council Work Session & Meeting Minutes January 22, 2025 would the city still want to have solar on the rooftop and if the answer was yes that it is an easy thing and no real risk involved, but if the answer is no that is where there is a challenge. It was stated that it would take longer to recoup our initial startup costs. Administrator Statz stated that he thinks that was the operative question – if he had brought forward that there was a grant for 60% of the costs for installation of solar on the building, would council want to complete it versus it was a really good idea when the city was receiving 90% of the costs with the Inflation Reduction Act. He stated that at 60% if still was quite a deal. Council Member Mosher had questions regarding selling back of unused energy versus battery storage as there was no battery storage with the system. Administrator Statz stated that he calculated 4,000 kw rather than 6,000 kw which would provide a quicker return on the investment for the city. There was discussion of the lifecycle of the system and Administrator Statz stated 20 years with a guarantee, but the guarantee diminishes over time along with efficiency. Council Member Kubat stated 60% would allow him to probably be in favor of the long-term investment as it was presented, if that was the only thing presented. Motion by Council Member Kubat to direct staff to move forward with the project and to inform council if anything changes. Motion failed due to lack of no second. No motion came forward and Attorney Glaser stated that in the absence of a motion, the contract would move forward. Motion by Council Member Mosher, seconded by Council Member Rios to direct staff to work with the contractor to establish a pause in the contract that could reasonably be accommodated without exceeding the risk of $35,000 (federal tax credit) and directing staff that if that is not feasible to move forward with the project. Roll call. Council Members Rios, Council Member Mosher and Mayor Golden Aye, Council Member Kubat Nay. Motion carried. 4. Brian Drive Storm Pond Project Administrator Statz stated that before the council was a stormwater/backyard drainage project at 6996 Brian Drive. He stated that he used the address as it was the property owner who initiated the conversation. He also stated that the pond does affect several neighboring properties. Administrator Statz wanted to bring the project to council’s attention and obtain direction. He stated that previously council approved moving forward with the project contingent upon completing permitting requirements. He reported that in the meantime, since council gave direction to go ahead and explore the project. He also reported that staff has spoken with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and ascertained that the city does not need a permit which was a cost savings. Administrator Statz stated that staff has worked with the city’s engineers to determine whether that the ponds downstream would be affected, and they will not. He stated that staff feels that the project is viable/feasible project. He reported that a neighborhood meeting was held several months prior and ascertained whether three other abutting property owners or than 6996 Brian Drive would be amenable to a small assessment. He also reported that 6996 Brian Drive’s assessment would be $6,000 as they were the most benefited by the project and the other property owner’s assessment would be $2,000 as they would gain a small portion of yard as their situation is that their homes are higher and are not as affected as 6996 Brian Drive. He stated that in order to complete an assessment project similar to this, usually involves a feasibility study, several public hearings and a large amount of engineering time and effort. Administrator Statz stated that if all residents sign a Special Assessment Agreement/Waiver of Hearing & Appeal he believed that some of the step could be skipped and move the project forward without a large amount of cost. He stated that because the project was only $45,000, the city would rather not spend $25,000 on engineering. He also stated that if the waivers could be obtained Page 12 of 16