2011-06-23_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

151 Member Barrett questioned why the task force would not want to make a recommendation before the PIan 152 was adopted. 153 154 Board Member consensus was in the need to provide a recommendation to the two (2) member cities 155 before the March 31" ,2012 or 90 day deadline as previously discussed, 156 157 Mr. Petersen suggested that, as long as the Board remained on track for BWSR approval of the Plan in 158 November or December, there was no reason to wait until March or the extra ninety (90) days. 159 160 Selection Process / Membership Criteria 161 Chair Eckman advised that the proposal was for a total of ten (10) task force members, five (5) of whom 162 will be the GLWMO Board itself. 163 164 Update from Member Cities on Finance Research (if available) 165 Chair Eckman questioned how likely it was that the ten (10) year forecasted budget in the Plan would 166 change appreciably. 167 168 Mr. Petersen advised that the real change to the forecasted budget would be predicated on the TMDL 169 study results, since that was an unknown at this time and would remain so until sometime in 2013. Mr. 170 Petersen further advised that, once those more definitive BMP determinations and costs were available, it 171 may require a major amendment to the Third Generation Plan. Mr. Petersen questioned if the previous 172 motion of the GLWMO Board passed on May 19, 2011 may need to be revised. Mr. Petersen expressed 173 his understanding that the member cities would be performing their own due diligence, in addition to that 174 proposed for the task force. Mr. Petersen noted that direction from the Shoreview City Manager to his 175 staff was to put together financing scenarios for the GLWMO merging with an adjacent WD or WMO or 176 remaining an independent entity. 177 178 Chair Eckman asked Mr. Schwartz if he had a sense of direction from the Roseville City Council; with 179 Mr. Schwartz advising that to -date, he had received no direction; however, he was of the understanding 180 that the GLWMO Board would be performing due diligence and return to the City Council with a 181 recommendation. 182 183 Chair Eckman questioned how the Board could make a decision without knowing the preference of both 184 member City Councils. 185 186 Mr. Schwartz advised that he had already done research with the Roseville City Attorney for 187 implementing fees for properties within the GLWMO, to determine that it was financially feasible; and 188 noted the comment of one of the Roseville City Councilmembers who expressed interest in the GLWMO 189 analysis commitment. Mr. Schwartz opined that staff of the member cities could provide a 190 recommendation to their respective and partner City Councils on recommended financing options; but in 191 terms of the GLWMO Board's future governance, that would need to come as a result of the task force 192 analysis and Board recommendation. Mr. Schwartz advised that he could perform an analysis for an 193 annual storm water rate for those parcels in the GLWMO and calculate a formula to convert that revenue 194 on a per parcel basis for the GLWMO and their budget projections. 195 196 Member Miller noted that, with a task force deadline of March 31, 2012, the member cities would have 197 already set their utility rates for 2012 in November 2011; and suggested that the task force complete their 198 work before then to allow the GLWMO Board to make a recommendation to the City Councils for their 199 consideration in November of 2011. 200