My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2012_0917
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
CC_Minutes_2012_0917
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/3/2012 1:05:30 PM
Creation date
10/3/2012 1:05:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/17/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, September 17, 2012 <br /> Page 7 <br /> City Manager Malinen noted the cost for city-owned street lights versus utility rev- <br /> enue to pay those bills. <br /> Ms. Bloom advised that each street light averages $13.00 per month for energy; <br /> with Mayor Roe noting those costs are currently paid by taxpayers across the city. <br /> Councilmember McGehee questioned if some street lights had motion detectors, <br /> since she frequently saw some going on and off. <br /> Ms. Bloom advised that those were not motion detectors; and that simply meant the <br /> ballast was going and observers should alert the City or Xcel Energy of those par- <br /> ticular lights. Ms. Bloom advised that the observer could call either agency or there <br /> was an online form also available; and clarified that the flickering should not be <br /> happening. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that almost all street lights were owned by Xcel Energy, not the <br /> City. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Bloom advised that the PWETC <br /> was currently in discussion about changing to LED light bulbs to save energy costs. <br /> Ms. Bloom noted that the City had switched to LED's in signal lights in 2003, at a <br /> considerable savings to the City on electricity costs. <br /> Mayor Roe, referencing the Pavement Management Program (PMP), noted that <br /> there was a projected shortfall in that funding; and advised that there had been pre- <br /> vious discussion to use some existing street bond levy funding to apply to the PMP <br /> fund to shore it up, as well as the new property tax levy. With these proposed <br /> changes in the Assessment Policy, Mayor Roe asked if there had been any im- <br /> provements to the PMP to throttle back on those increases. <br /> Public Works Director Duane Schwartz advised that, unfortunately, most projects <br /> projected out for the next 10-15 years are mill and overlay projects without any as- <br /> sessment; and nothing significant would be coming into the PMP fund. <br /> Ms. Bloom noted that the PMP frequently received benefit from State Aid funds <br /> due to pass through costs; however, Ms. Bloom noted that that fund was getting hit <br /> at between $700,000 - $900,000 annually; with advance funds already spent for un- <br /> anticipated projects (e.g. County Road C-2 connection). With this assessment poli- <br /> cy, Ms. Bloom opined that it would assist with the backlog of state aid funds. <br /> Councilmember McGehee questioned how many more turnback roads the City was <br /> going to get; since they often required more to repair when received. <br /> Ms. Bloom advised that there was a backlog of turnbacks at this time; with Victoria <br /> Street scheduled for 2014; and looking at County Road B west of Cleveland. While <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.