My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-02-23_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-02-23_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2016 1:51:13 PM
Creation date
2/18/2016 1:33:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/23/2016
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
203
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
446 <br />Member Seigler opined he felt the need to better understand the projected <br />447 <br />financials. <br />448 <br />449 <br />Chair Stenlund asked Member Seigler how those concerns could best be <br />450 <br />addressed to provide a comfort level, such as what additional analysis staff could <br />451 <br />provide confirming and clarifying that positive cash flow. <br />452 <br />453 <br />Member Cihacek noted the Finance Department provided a positive cash flow <br />454 <br />analysis. <br />455 <br />456 Member Seigler stated that as long as the system could be done without any <br />457 negatives or financial expenditure by the city, he would support recommending <br />458 going forward. However, Member Seigler stated that his concerns were based on <br />459 the risk that the city could lose money in any of the twenty years of the <br />460 agreement; and if proven that wouldn't happen, he wouldi�l el much better in <br />461 making the recommendation to proceed. <br />462 <br />463 Member Cihacek noted that the agreement had a minimum production guarantee, <br />464 and if they didn't meet it, the city didn't pay, or if there was any circumstance <br />465 where the city couldn't sustain their power grid. Member Cihacek suggested that <br />466 additional information could be provided by staff to the PWETC via email if that <br />467 would address Member Seigler's concerns. 1111111111111111111lIL. <br />468 <br />469 Chair Stenl questioned if there was any way the OVAL may not be there in <br />470 twenty y VW <br />471 <br />472 Mr. Culver expressed his doubt, noting the only thing he was aware of was within <br />473 the next 5 — 6 years, a significant investment projected at $1 million was planned <br />474 for the OVAL's cooling system and infrastructure improvements. Mr. Culver <br />475 noted that this was one of the concerns in the City's CIP going into a negative <br />476 balance more quickly related to that particular projected expense, and the overall <br />477 question of where that money may come from. Mr. Culver opined that he <br />478 anticipated every conceivable avenue will be pursued; and noted that, in the past, <br />479 outside funding based on the OVAL's regional draw had been pursued <br />480 legislatively. <br />481 <br />482 Member Cihacek Jistioned if the building would ever be considered for <br />483 demolition, and suggested a more viable scenario may be repurposing it. <br />484 <br />485 Motion <br />486 Cihacek moved, Member Seigler seconded, recommending to the City Council <br />487 that the City enter into a Master Solar Services Agreement (Attachment A) with <br />488 provider Sundial Energy or its affiliate, LLC, for a solar power facility site license <br />489 agreement; with that recommendation contingent upon staff's due diligence in <br />490 confirming the positive cash flow during the lifecycle of the system and <br />Page 11 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.