2016-11-29_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

126 Mr. Miller advised that the only other costs were other infrastructure costs shared 127 for mains over to the Roseville booster station, based on a formula and long-term 128 contract and relationship. Mr. Miller advised that the contract is reviewed and 129 renegotiated at each renewal; typically over a twenty-year term, with the next 130 renewal in approximately 6 — 8 years. Mr. Miller advised that the only other option 131 for water usage would be partnering with other communities, such as Minneapolis 132 or others with their own well systems, since SPRW S uses recharged surface water 133 versus underground water from aquifers. 134 135 Member Lenz asked how this worked for homes on the border of Roseville with 136 adjacent communities. 137 138 Assistant Public Works Director Freihammer advised that the majority of those 139 homes (e.g. Larpenteur Avenue) were on the City of Roseville's system and in some 140 cases the city may have St. Paul residents on its system and vice versa, with billing 141 done for those crossovers by the city they're located in and then adjusted between 142 cities accordingly. 143 144 Member Wozniak questioned why, if Roseville's water usage and sewer flows were 145 declining or at least not as high as surrounding communities, yet the costs applied 146 by the Metropolitan Council were going up 19%. 147 148 Finance Director Miller agreed that was correct for the last fiscal year, with flows 149 dropping for sewer. However, he noted the other 100 communities in the 150 Metropolitan Council's system experienced even less usage and flows and 151 therefore, since the reverse had been true in the past with Roseville receiving the 152 benefit of those calculations, this round the City of Roseville was getting hit harder 153 for 2017. 154 155 Member Wozniak asked if part of this was due to those other communities having 156 a better handle on their I & I than Roseville. 157 158 Assistant Public Works Director Freihammer stated it could also be based on more 159 water use demand or growth in a community. 160 161 Chair Cihacek asked how much I & I was inflating these numbers. 162 163 Assistant Public Works Director Freihammer agreed that the Metropolitan Council 164 metered any flow going into the system and charged accordingly; and while the 165 City of Roseville had been on their I & I list for needed corrections and 166 improvements, he advised in the last correspondence this summer it had not 167 exceeded that threshold, even though the threshold continued to be ramped lower. 168 Mr. Freihammer opined that the city continued to make progress on their I & I rates, 169 with the annual main lining projects being undertaken. Mr. Freihammer noted that 170 the Metropolitan Council was also performing their own infrastructure 171 improvements on their main system, as noted by Finance Director Miller, opining Page 4 of 20