My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-07-26_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-07-26_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/28/2011 10:39:09 AM
Creation date
9/28/2011 10:38:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/26/2011
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
perspective; he further opined that good governance required that this burden not <br /> be deferred to the next generation or the responsibility of the next City Council. <br /> Member Vanderwall noted that the "kick the can down the road" approach to <br /> financial responsibility was not working at a federal or state level, and that it <br /> wouldn't work locally either. Member Vanderwall spoke in support of a "pay as <br /> you go" approach was much more prudent. <br /> Member Vanderwall provided a personal analogy with his townhome association <br /> and lack of adequate capital funding; with the Board's Finance Committee <br /> suggesting at 35%increase in monthly dues, 6 x's the current rate; and likened <br /> this to that situation. Member Vanderwall opined that if another ten (10)years <br /> went by before addressing this CIP need, it would only be more expensive; in <br /> addition to the ongoing repairs and emergencies and added costs over that time <br /> span. <br /> Member Vanderwall recognized that this need is problematic, since it is <br /> essentially a hidden cost, since most infrastructure is underground, and no one <br /> sees it when its working properly or effectively; and only became obvious when <br /> problem developed or it wasn't working. <br /> Member Vanderwall expressed confidence in the community's excitement to <br /> finally address these CIP needs; and the positive steps being recommended by this <br /> City Council and staff to address it now and avoid costlier and more major issues <br /> in the future through continual deferral. <br /> Member Felice opined that, by taking steps now, there was some idea of what you <br /> were coming up against; and if deferral of CIP needs continued, it created too <br /> many unknowns. While being difficult to tell citizens they were going to need to <br /> pay more money out, Member Felice opined that there was a good reason for this <br /> projected rate increase to maintain what infrastructure the City owned; and to <br /> avoid potentially catastrophic failures of the system. <br /> Member Gjerdingen opined that the only way this rate increase could be <br /> challenged is if the City was spending too much repairing the infrastructure due to <br /> lack of good management of that resource. Member Gjerdingen advised that his <br /> only question was how careful the analysis had been and how accurate the <br /> numbers. <br /> Chair DeBenedet, based on his extensive background in Civil Engineering, his <br /> review of plans and specifications for many infrastructure systems, and his first- <br /> hand experience in working with his plumber father, and opined that the <br /> infrastructure issues currently needing addressed were not a surprise to him. <br /> Chair DeBenedet advised that installations and materials used in the 1960's would <br /> no longer be used based on changes in the industry and technology improvements. <br /> Chair DeBenedet noted that the City of Roseville was not the only community <br /> Page 9 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.