My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-07-26_PWETC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-07-26_PWETC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2016 8:26:04 AM
Creation date
8/26/2016 8:25:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/26/2016
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.
/
19
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
Noting staff considered water and sewer infrastructure of high importance, <br /> Member Lenz asked that staff not lose sight of the importance of bus shelters in <br /> the community, even though they may be less life-critical elements of the city's <br /> infrastructure. <br /> Mr. Culver duly noted that observation; and clarified the importance of the water <br /> and sewer funds was due to their status of being Enterprise Funds which are more <br /> challenging to fund. Mr. Culver noted the huge needs remaining in addressing <br /> storm sewer issues in the community; and while some interfund loans had been <br /> done in the past from the water or sanitary sewer funds, those funds were "siloed" <br /> and often made it difficult to prioritize one asset over another, while funding from <br /> the General Fund was easier to address (e.g. streets, retaining walls, fences, trails, <br /> etc.). For those categories, Mr. Culver noted the city could look between different <br /> asset categories and needs based on their importance. <br /> Member Trainor opinioned this document was a terrific product and very <br /> impressive; and stated he looked forward to the city moving ahead with it. <br /> 7. City Council Joint Meeting Review <br /> Based on the recent joint meeting of the PWETC and City Council, Mr. Culver <br /> reported staff had drafted a proposed work plan of items, as detailed in <br /> Attachment A (lines 15 —21), showing initial areas of interest and, while other <br /> priorities may come up during the year. Mr. Culver opined the dialogue from the <br /> meeting minutes showed good discussion, and he didn't see any particular items <br /> outside those areas brought up for the PWETC to expend any additional time on. <br /> Pending negotiation of the Recycling contract and the organics recycling option, <br /> Chair Cihacek suggested removing that item from the work plan for the upcoming <br /> year. <br /> Mr. Culver noted there was an opportunity if the PWETC wanted to recommend <br /> the city expand drop-off locations for organics; and advised staff would work with <br /> Eureka to manage them accordingly, whether at the city's compost site or with a <br /> City Hall drop off site. Mr. Culver noted both came with their own challenges, <br /> but suggested further discussion in the future. <br /> Chair Cihacek stated he wasn't clear on where to move forward with sewer and <br /> water services, since recommendations of the PWETC had not been found <br /> satisfactory to the City Council at this point. Other than small options and bid <br /> alternatives for lining laterals, Chair Cihacek questioned what was left to address <br /> that hadn't already been done. <br /> In response, Mr. Culver noted the presentation done over the last year by Paul <br /> Pasko and the City Council, and based on the City Council's initial feedback, <br /> reported there was some interest in exploring some programs offered currently by <br /> Page 12 of 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.