2015-10-27_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

impacted depending in the bidding climate and dictating what could be accomplished from year to year. Mr. Culver reported that the pipe lining efforts had not been hit as hard by inflation or by competitive bidding in the contracting field, since it was more of a specialty area versus general street construction bids. However, Mr. Culver admitted that it defined how much work could be done each year, and while an annual look at the CIP was performed and revised accordingly, there may be a better way for that analysis to inform the annual projections and amount available for CIP and operations, especially in addressing systems that may fail sooner than anticipated, and impacting depreciation projections. From his personal perspective, Chair Stenlund opined that overall percentages remained basically at or less than inflation, providing very competitive number with the City still able to deliver services in spite of a very aged infrastructure system with approximately 67 miles of clay pipes remaining. Recycling Operations Despite being able to reduce recycling rates in the last budget cycle, Mr. Miller reported for 2016 there would be a reality check as revenue sharing projections were falling very much lower than anticipated due to a reduction in resale values. Mr. Miller clarified that the City of Roseville's volume remained strong, one of the highest in the metropolitan area, but resale value and demand was not comparable to past years and not materializing as projected. Therefore, Mr. Miller advised that staff was proposing a rate increase for 2016. At the request of Member Wozniak, Mr. Culver explained the increase in SCORE grant funding from 2015 to 2016 based on a series of factors and how and what the City of Roseville qualified for based on their annual application. Mr. Culver advised that, since the City Council just approved the grant application at their meeting last night, staff would bring more information to them once Ramsey County approves the grant application. Mr. Miller explained that one reason for the increase was that the 2015 budget understated the amount of grant funds received by the City of Roseville, clarifying that it was closer to $75,000 to $80,000 with those numbers adjusted to reality as well. As part of this discussion, Mr. Culver reminded the PWETC of the contract with Eureka Recycling expiring on December 31, 2016, and work early in 2016 on the Requests for Proposal (RFP's) for 2017 and beyond. Given this decrease in revenue sharing monies, Mr. Culver noted that it should be anticipated that this fee may change substantially going forward. Also, Mr. Culver noted that the City of Roseville received a very favorable rate from Eureka Recycling, since Roseville serves as their "gold standard" among other jurisdictions and agencies based on the unique aspects (e.g. residual rates indicate 2-3% trash coming out of recycled materials) compared to other communities and providing additional value to Eureka Recycling operations. Page 6 of 18