Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 05.27.2008MINUTES COUNCIL WORKSHOP MAY 27, 200$ 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS A Council Workshop was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Ken Olson at 6:30 p.m on May 27, 2008. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: x Emelie Eaton _x Kate Hart _x Gay Easton x Alex Wilkins _x Doug Poehls _x Mark Mace _x Chuck Dickerson _x Norm Stamper OTHERS PRESENT• Sam Painter Mary Embleton Bi11 Sheridan Jan Faught James Caniglia Rick Musson Terry Ruff Derek Yeager Will Guenthner Chad Hanson, Great West Engineering Carl Anderson, Morrison-Maierle Public Input (three-minute limit): Citizens may address the Council regarding any item of City business not on the agenda. The duration for an individual speaking under Public Input is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the Council will not take action on any item pat on the agenda. There was no public input. Laurel Volunteer Ambulance: • Appointment of Alyssa Francis Ambulance Director Jan Faught introduced Alyssa Francis to the council and asked that the appointment be approved on June 3~. • Resolution -Amend resolution for EMT-B course fees Jan stated that the previous resolution did not state a specific dollaz amount for reimbursement for EMT-B course fees so this resolution is needed to do so. The resolution will be on the June 3`d council agenda. Centennial Cammittee u ate Mayor Olson presented a Centennial Committee update. At the Veterans' Cemetery dedication on Monday, he invited Governor Schweitzer and Montana's representatives to attend Laurel's centennial celebration on August 8~' and 9a'. The activities will include the all-class reunion on July 5t1i, a BBQ outside city hall on August 8~', a parade, a flyover, the Odyssey West production at Riverside Park on August 9~', and Shakespeare in the Park on August 27~'. Gay Easton and Emelie Eaton have been actively working on a book project of historic commercial and residential buildings within the city, which will be available for sale soon. Centennial label beverages will be sold at the events. Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 Prepazations aze being made for the Odyssey West production with Rob Quist on August 9`~'. Intermountain Distributing might sponsor a promotional billboard advertising the events. The Public Works Department is working on new signage advertising the centennial celebration. The Centennial Committee will meet on June 5~` at 7:00 p.m. Jo ce Jense Western Herita a Center: • Plaque at Riverside Pazk Emelie Eaton introduced Joyce Jensen, who recently informed Ernelie that she had worked up a plaque for part of the history at Riverside Park. Joyce stated that she spoke as a member of the Yellowstone Historical Satiety, which has put up a number of historic plaques since 1953. The first plaque of the Canyon Creek Battle site is on a sandstone boulder in Colson Park. Eazlier this year, the Society decided to do another plaque and thought that Riverside Park would be an appropriate place to deal with the World Ward II prisoners of waz. Joyce was here to find out the council's interest in the project. She distributed copies of the first draft wording for the sign, which included a line drawing of a character that came out of a County Extension Agent report. Aline drawing could be engraved in woad or etched on metal and put on a river rack foundation of some sort. She explained several different signs that are available and suggested the possibility of using a photograph such as the one of Squaze Butte between Laurel and Park City. Joyce explained the problems of finding beet labor during WWII and the eventual use of prisoners of war for that work. The prisoners, who were put in camps of up to five hundred, were doing thinning and blocking in the spring and helping with the harvest in the fall. Prisoners would stay for a few days to a couple weeks and then be replaced. In the summer of 1945, the prisoners of war stayed in Montana all summer and worked in five sugar factories in the state. Camps were located near all of the sugar factories, and one camp was at Riverside Pazk. Joyce asked if the council was interested in the plaque. Kate stated that the idea ties into the future plans for Riverside Park. She requested that the sign be large enough to be seen easily and be able to be moved to another location in the park if changes are made there. Joyce will do more research. Mayor Olson stated appreciation for her work and asked her to return with the proposed project for the council's consideration. Carl Anderson. Morrison-Maierle: • Reconsideration ofwater and sewer rate studies based on improvements to the WWTP and the WTP Carl Anderson distributed copies of Resolution No. R04-117, which includes the wastewater base rates for the five-year plan from January 2005 through June 30, 2010. The resolution approved afive- yearplan for wastewater rates that began in 2005, so the city is currently three years into the five-year plan to raise rates for the proposed wastewater project. As part of the rate study, Carl reviewed the updated costs for the wastewater project, the current rate and the two additional rate increases associated with the resolution. Exhibit A shows rate increases scheduled on July 1, 200$ and July 1, 2009. Carl stated that provides enough money to move forward with the wastewater project without additional rate increases, assuming that the city does not set aside money for water and sewer line replacement associated with the Eighth Avenue project. That project has been delayed several times and is currently scheduled for 2013 or 2014, which is after the five-yeaz planning period for these rates. There is enough money to pay for the water and sewer improvements in the water and sewer 2 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 utilities today. Carl explained two alternatives for the wastewater rates and distributed information from the dra$ Wastewater Rate Study. Alternative i would utilize the money for the wastewater project, which would reduce the sewer rates a little. Alternative financing would need to be found for the Eighth Avenue project. Alternative i would utilize the money in reserves for the wastewater treatment project. Alternative ii assumes that the city utilizes the existing reserves and has to borrow more money. The handout showed the current 2007-2008 rate and the rate increases for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, which were approved by Resolution No. R04-117. The last two sets of columns showed the additional increases far 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Carl stated that MMT made sure the city is matching operational and maintenance requirements, continues to have the right bond reserves on the loans, and has a reserve of $500,000 in the operational budget. Laurel has a base rate and a volume charge based upon the volume that people utilize during the winter months. The base rate does not include any amount of flow. Morrison-Maierle recommends keeping with the rate study done three years ago and the resolution passed three years ago that only increased the base and kept the volume rate the same. When the rate study was done, it was determined that Laurel had a fairly high volume charge versus other communities, as shown in a letter he distributed to the council. The letter contained a table that compared water and sewer rates far a number of communities. The table included the name of the city, its population, base rate, volume charge and total charge for 3000 gallons of sewage. Laurel's current base rate is $18.07, the volume charge is $3.42 per 1,000 gallons, and the total charge for 3,000 gallons would be $28.33. This is the highest sewer charge for the cities on the list. Carl stated that the recommendation three years ago was to increase the base and leave the volume alone. Copies of the distributed information are attached to these original council workshop minutes. There was further discussion regarding the costs for the Eighth Avenue project and the discharge permit. Mayor Olson thanked Carl for his presentation. Great West Engineering:. • Request to proceed with design engineering outlined in Task Order No. 6 Bill Sheridan introduced Chad Hanson of Great West Engineering. Chad Hanson stated that Task Order No. 6, which was approved by the council, includes the engineering. Typically, a community waits to start the engineering until the grant funds are received because it does not have the money. However, the City of Laurel has the money in reserves. Chad stated that, once the grant application is actually submitted, which was done an May 2, 2008, any money spent on engineering design counts towards match. All of the engineering design was budgeted to the City of Laurel's reserves. As discussed at a recent council workshop, there have been concerns with development and some of the water system improvements may need to happen sooner rather than later. The schedule would move up a year if the design engineering could be started now. Mayor Olson thanked Chad for his explanation. Fire Department: • Presentation of proposed fire hall Terry Ruff; Derek Yeager, and Will Guenthner attended the council workshop. Copies of the information in the PowerPoint presentation were distributed to the council. Derek stated that the presentation was the fire department's proposal far acost-effective, long-term solution to a growing 3 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 problem. The presentation highlights included: History of the project to its current position; What problems will this project eliminate; The proposed building; The proposed building site; Fire Department numbers are telling a story; What the department wants and why; What is needed to continue; Support for the project; Answering and clarification of issues. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is attached to these council workshop minutes. Derek stated that the design of the proposed building was initiated by the department's own programming study. The building is designed with intentions of 40 plus years of use by both volunteer and paid staffwith the intention that the building would serve as the primary fire station far the City of Laurel and the four Rural Fire Districts. The department prepared a comparison of the 8th Avenue and the North First Avenue properties that are being considered for the site. The department prefers the North First Avenue site north of Ricci's Express. Derek explained the department's Project Media Plan to inform the public of the need. The presentation was very informative. Following the presentation, there was council discussion regarding G.O. bonding, the Capital Improvements Plan, education of the public, the timetable required to include the issue on the November ballot, and the fire department's fleet. Derek stated that the fire department is ready to being the media plan. Council Members Eaton, Mace, Hart, Stamper, Dickerson and Easton expressed support for the project and thanked the firemen for an excellent presentation. After further discussion, Mayor Olson stated that a resolution for the council's intent to place this item on the November ballot would be presented at the council workshop on June 10th for council consideration at the June 17th council meeting. A timeline will also be presented at the June 10th council workshop. • Ordinance - Adoption of the International Fire Code Terry Ruff stated that the State of Montana recently adopted the International Fire Code and several cities have also done so. The first reading of the ordinance will be on the June 3'~ council agenda. • Resolution -Small Services Contract with Concrete R Us The contract with Concrete R Us is for concrete work around the FAP. The resolution will be on the June 3'~ council agenda. Police Department: • Ordinance - LMC 10.52.01 S, Parking on Colorado Avenue Chief Musson stated the police department's support for the fire department's proposal for a new fire hall. Mayor Olson asked if other department heads wanted to express support. Jan, Bill, and Mary voiced support for the project. Rick explained that the ordinance is needed to delete parking restrictions at the old middle school location on Colorado Avenue. The first reading of the ordinance will be on the June 3`~ council agenda. Planning Department_ • Resolution - Freserve America James Caniglia thanked Emelie Eaton for scheduling a meeting last week with the Historic Preservation representative from Helena. James explained that the Preserve America program was created in 2005 and fifteen Montana cities have joined the program. The program is a reward for historic programs that have been put in place by cities. Laurel could qualify for this because of the Walking Tour Famphlets that were created, the history book that is being created currently, and the 4 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 upcoming centennial celebration. Freserve America requires the formation of a committee, and Laurel could ask members of the Centennial Committee to join the Preserve America Committee. The program casts no money, and the city would get a free Preserve America City sign to place off the freeway exit to help promote the downtown. Several University of Montana studies have shown that one out of every three tourist stops in a small community happens if it is an historical community. For Laurel, it is a challenge to get tourists to cross the underpass. By getting the word out that Laurel is a nice town with historic buildings, some of the extra travelers might stop to see the historic buildings. James explained why he put this on the agenda quickly. If the city applies for this on a federal level, it can apply on a state level at the same time and could get state funds to have buildings assessed and surveyed at a fifty-fifty match. Funds can be in-kind as well. James stated that the buildings on Main Street could be surveyed to see if they are historic or not, and the historic district could be promoted. James explained that historic buildings could be added to the National Registry, which would give even better promotion for the downtown azea. Business owners could get plaques on their windows telling the history of the buildings for just $50. One benefit from the state level is that the city could start creating historic neighborhoods and pick and choose houses based on architectural styles and age of homes. The committee would make up these rules. When neighborhoods become historic, the home values usually increase about 30 percent over the ensuing years, as opposed to non-historic neighborhoods. People start investing in their neighborhoods more, and it would be the same with the business community. With the National Registry, if businesses restore a building that has been altered in a way that makes it no longer qualify as historic, they can get 20 percent Federal tax breaks and 5 percent State tax breaks to restore it if it is on the National Register. James explained the TIIP Fund, which is a State of Montana grant program for museums. James distributed basic information packets an the Federal program to the council. A resolution is needed in order to apply on the Federal level. That would allow the city to apply at the State level without first being accepted on the Federal level. That way, the city could get this moving before the centennial celebration and might be able to have a fundraiser at the centennial celebration to help with match funds to get some afthe buildings and homes surveyed. Doug Poehls thanked James for the research and presentation. The resolution will be an the June 3rd council agenda. Other: At this time, Mayor Olson asked Joanna Johnson to give her presentation on becoming a Sister City. Joanna presented the idea of Laurel, Montana, being a Sister City with the Musekee area in Thailand. She explained her 2007 trip to the Musekee area, gave an introduction to the founder of the ministry in Musekee (De Tay), and stated practical ways to get involved. Joanna asked if the council would be interested in establishing a Sister City outreach to Musekee. The newspaper will run an article in next week's paper. Joanna will be in Thailand from May 28tH through July 31St and will attend another council meeting after she returns. A copy of the information is attached to the original council workshop minutes. Public Works Department: ~ Resolution -MDT Project, Laurel Northeast & 2002 Turn Lane -Laurel Bill Sheridan stated that the agreement is a sidewalk/storm drain agreement for the Laurel Northeast & 2002 Turn Lane project on South First Avenue and East Main Street to Mossmain. The resolution will be on the June 3ra council agenda. The MDT project is scheduled to let in November and be done in 2009. 5 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 • Resolution -Srnall Services Contract with Stevens Brothers to fix piping at the WWTP Bill stated that the small construction contract for $3,400 with Stevens Brothers Mechanical is to repair piping at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The resalution will be on the June 3rd council agenda. • Resolution -Srnall Services Contract with Liquid Engineering for cleaning and inspection of the water reservoir Bill stated that the small construction contract for $5,030 with Liquid Engineering is for cleaning and inspection of the water reservoir. The resolution will be on the June 3rd council agenda. • Resolution -Small Services Contract with Rosebud Engineering to upgrade controls at the WWTP Bill stated that the agreement with Rosebud Engineering for $23,9$0 is to upgrade the control system at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The small service contracts are outside the scope of the WWTP project. Bill presented another issue to the council. He stated that a local contractor has agreed to make the needed improvements in the ambulance office in the FAP building for approximately $6,000. If the proper documents are obtained this week, a resolution and contract for this project will be on the June 3`~ council agenda. Clerk/Treasurer: • Resolution - MMIA Employee Benefits Flan Mary Embleton stated that the resolution for approval of the MMIA Employee Benefits Plan is presented annually. MMIA provides a statewide health program for cities and towns, and the City of Laurel joined the program in 2003. City employees will be able to keep the current Blue Select plan or choose between four additional plans. Employees recently voted on the vision and dental plans, which will be the same for all employees. Employees must submit the enrollment forms by Friday and the Group Renewal Farm will be completed by June 3rd. The premium year is July 1 gt through June 30~', and the benefit year coincides with the calendar year. There was discussion regarding the premium rates, the employee contribution, and whether the City of Laurel is subsidizing cities that do not have a cap on premiums. The resolution will be on the June 3rd council agenda. Executive review: • Discussion -Job description for the Chief Administrative Officer Mayor Olson stated that he has not received comments from department heads or the council. A resolution adopting the job description will be added to the June 3rd council agenda. Chuck asked if residency requirements should be included in the job description. Mayor Olson stated that residency requirements would be included in the contract. • Discussion - Heating/cooling issues in the two-story building of city hall Mayor Olson stated that the heating/cooling project was included in the budget two years ago but was not included the next year. Since more documentation is needed, the item will be on the June 10tH council workshop agenda. • Discussion -Purchase and Procurement Policy 6 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 Mayor Olson stated that the Purchase and Procurement Policy was discussed with department heads today and another meeting is scheduled next week. The discussion includes the current and proposed caps, contracts, the process for procurements, and proper terminology for the policy. • Appointments: o HOME Program Citizen Advisory and Loan Review Boazd: Jared Kaiser; Bill Sheridan Mayor Olson stated that the appointments will be on the June 3rd council agenda. • Insurance and Benefit Committee: Mark Guy; H. P. Nuernberger Mayor Olson stated that the appointments will be on the June 3'd council agenda. • Council Issues: o Update on letter to MDT regazding signage on South l5t Avenue (Chuck Dickerson Bill Sheridan stated that a speed limit sign has been installed. A directional sign has not been installed, and Bill will contact MDT to discuss the issue further. o Update on status of hiring pool personnel (Norm Stamper) Bi11 stated that a pool manager has been hired and applications for lifeguards are being processed. The pool has been cleaned, will be filled next week, and is scheduled to open on June 16tH Other items: There was no discussion. Review of draft council agenda for June 3, 2008: • Public hearings: o Ordinance No. 008-04: Ordinance amending Sections 17.66.070 of the Laurel Municipal Code, adding a provision for providing notice to the Yellowstone Historic Preservation Baazd upon application for a demolition permit prior to demolition of the building(s) providing for athree-business-day period for purposes of photographing historic buildings. (15t reading - 05/06/2008) o Ordinance No. 008-OS: Ordinance amending Section 17.56.030 of the Laurel Municipal Code to clarify when a damaged non-conforming use residential structure can be rebuilt. (1~ reading - 05/06/2008) The following items will be added to the June 3rd council agenda: ordinance to adopt the International Fire Codes; Resolution to adopt the job description for the Chief Administrative Officer; and a resolution for a small services contract for the remodel in the ambulance office. Attendance at the June 3rd council meeting: Emelie Eaton will not attend the June 3'~ council meeting. Announcements: Emelie Eaton attended the dedication ceremony for the Veterans' Cemetery on Memorial Day. She asked if a map of the triangulaz part of the cemetery is available. Norm Stamper stated that a landscape rendering for the first phase is available, and he will contact Jolene Rieck to get a copy. He will see if a large map is available for display at city hall. 7 Council Workshop Minutes of May 27, 2008 Norm Stamper stated that he was extremely happy with the turnout for the dedication ceremony for the Veterans' Cemetery. He attended today's bid opening for construction of the Veterans' Cemetery. The three bids received were over the $1.5 million budget, which included engineering costs, for the project sa additional funds will need to be raised. Norm stated that Jolene Rieck informed him that Bill Enright has the drawings for the master plan ready to be reviewed by the Cemetery Commission. There was discussion regazding Yellowstone County and the City of Laurel obtaining water rights from the Ditch Company for the respective cemeteries. Chuck Dickerson attended the dedication of the Veterans' Cemetery on Monday and the ribbon cutting ceremony at Cenex today. He asked regarding correspondence received from the Laurel Lions Club regazding providing gazbage service for the Culpepper and Merriweather Circus on July 5`" Mayor Olson stated that the service will be provided. There was discussion regazding the CIP workshop with Miral Garnradt on Saturday, June 7cn Breakfast will begin at 8:00 a.m Mayor Olson stated that the budget committee will review the Mayor and Council budgets at the meeting on Wednesday. Department heads will be scheduled for the next few Wednesdays. The council workshop adjourned at 9:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, C~;z. G~-~.~- Cindy A11en Council Secretary NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for the listed workshop agenda items. 8 May 27, 2008 First draft of wordin for ro osed si n for Riverside Park During World War II, American armed forces captured enemy soldiers, in German and Italian uniform, during battles in North Africa and Europe. About 1/z million of these prisoners of war were sent to the United States. Sugar was an important crop--it was used to make munitions and rubber. The fastest way to increase sugar production was to grow more sugar beets. However, sugar beets were very labor intensive. During 1944, 1945, and even spring of 1946, these enemy prisoners of war carne to Montana to work beets. Temporary camps were set up in as many as 19 places around the state. One of those camps was here at Riverside Park in Laurel. POWs came in the spring and fall for 1.0 days to 3 weeks to thin and block or to harvest beets. That group moved on and later another group came. Only in the summer of 1945 did they stay far more time. In 1946 the United States repatriated the prisoners. None remained in our area. contact: Arle Lohof, President, Yellowstone Historical Society 245-4560 Joyce Jensen, Western Heritage Center, 255-6$09 ext 141 ~l' RESOLUTION NO. R04-1 ] 7 A RESOLUTION INCREASING CITY OF LAUREL WASTEWATER RATES AND CHARGES TO ALL USERS. WHEREAS, the City Council passed and approved Resolution No.. R04-107, dated October 5, 2004, stating its intention to raise the City wastewater rates and charges and ordering a rate increase.hearing to be held; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted at the regular council meeting of November 2, 2004, where all interested or affected persons, associations, corporations and companies were af.Forded the opportunity to be present and represented by counsel, and to make such arguments as they considered proper, and all written comments were presented; and WHEREAS, the City Council has fully considered all comments, protests and arguments regarding the proposed rate increase presented at the hearing, and. the Council now finds it advisable to increase the wastewater rates and charges to all City users of the wastewater system, to accomplish the repairs and improvements of said facilities and defray increased costs of operation of said facilities. NOW, THERE)?ORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED as follows: 1. The wastewater rates and charges are raised in accordance with the attached "Exhibit A", incorporated herein in reference. 2. The new wastewater rates and charges shall become effective the January 10, 2005 billing period after the resolution is filed with the City Clerk-Treasurer. 3. This resolution is made pursuant to Amended Sections 49.7.101, and et. Seq., M.C.A: 4. This resolution hereby supersedes Resolution No. RO1-03. Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on November 16, 2004, by Alderwoman Johnson PASSED and APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel this 16`h day of November, 2004. APPROVED by the Mayor this 16~' day of November, 2004. ATTEST: r ~ .~.~2- Mary K. bleton, Clerk-Tress rer p ove s to orm. `~ am sinter, ega u s 1 Elk River Law Office, P.L.L.P. CITY OF LA L enneth E. Olson, Jr., Ma . r R04-117 Wastewater Rate Increase ~. EXHIBIT A SEWER UTILITY SERVICE REGULAR MONTHLY RATE 7n-city users customer base charge .................................................. Per Exhibit A Outside city users customer base charge ..................:....................... Per Exhibit A. Plus a consumption chazge @ $2.56 per 100 cu. ft, Refinery - pex agreement between City and Cenex Refinery ~ RV Dump Station. - 8 monthly customer charges @ 3/4" and 5/8" meters at base rate plus 8 units of consumption @ $2.56 per 100 cubic feet to be billed annually. Flat rate -- out-of-city users - increase per schedule; i.e. $36.76 on 01/01/05 and $38.76 on 07/01/05, per increase of base rate schedule Public schools shall be charged on actual use according to the above fozmula, i.e. base charge and consumption, for the months of September through June. Summer consumption for July and August shall be at ten percent (10%) of the average monthly sewer consumption for September through June. R.R. industrial waste - to be negotiated between MRL and the City These rates shall be charged on the total monthly water consumption with the exception of summer sewer charges fvr residential customers. The summer residential monthly charges shall be based on an average consumption from approximately October 10`t' to April 10`}'. Customers without an average will be billed a flat rate of one customer charge plus average consumption per month in proper classification (unit equals 100 cubic ft.). S stem Develo ment Fee No change R04-117 Wastewater Rate Increase ~. Base Rates-5 Year Plan EXHIBIT A CITY OF LAUREL WASTEWATER BASE RATES - 5 YEAR PLAN /~ . .r-Y~0~. METER METER 1/112005 7/1/2005 7/1/2006` 7/1/2007 7/1/2008 7/112009 SIDE F'AC7OR5 `RATE, $ RATE, $ RATE, $' RATE, $ RATE, $ RATE, $ 518"-3/4" 1.00 10.57 12.57 15.07 18.07 21.57 25.57 1" 1.25 13.21 15.71 18.84 22.59 26.96 31.96 11/4" 1.85 19.55 23.25 27.88 33.43 39.90 47.30 11/2" 2.50 26.43 31.43 37.68 45.18 53.93 63.93 2" 4.00 42.28 50.28 60.28 72.28 86.28 102.28 21/2" 6.25 66.06 78.56 94.19 112.94 .134.81 159.81 3" 7.50 79.28 94.28 113.03 135.53 161.78 191.78 4" . 12.50 132.13 157.13 188.38 225.88 269.63 319.63 6" 25.OD 264.25 314.25 376.75 451.75 539:25 639.25 8" 40.00 422.80 502.80 802.8D 722.80 862.80 1022.80 10" 60.00 634.20 754.20 904.20 1084.2D 1294.20 1534.20 12" 80.00 845.60 1005.60 1205.60 1445.60 1725.60 2045.60 14" 100.00 1057.00 1257.00 1507.00 1807.OD 2157.00 2557.00 NOTES: 1. Volume Charge remains at $2.56 per 100 cu.ft. for the 5 year period. 2. Base Gharge does not include any consumption. 3. Wastewater Base Rates not applicable to standby fire line water meters. 4. Volume Charges based on average water consumption for October-March (6 months) 5. Base Charges will be based on the appropriate meter size for the application or a separate base charge far each dwelling or business unit. 6. Special Rates for utility customers must be authorized and approved by the City Council. Page 1 _~ 1 inflation rate of 3°/t, per year. This cost was then increased by 5°/a to ensure that adequate inflation had been applied in projecting the cost to 2013 prices. The amount required to set aside at this time, assuming it would continue to grow at 3% until its application in 2013 was determined to be $728,285. Since this is greater than the amount available to set aside at this time, the MDT project will require additional funding sources, such as grants or loans. Surplus monies of $248,000 in the operating fund were applied such that the size of the loan required for Phase II was reduced. Phase II is anticipated to be funded with these surplus operating funds, a $750,000 TSEP grant, and a loan of $3,302,0OO..This would result in an annual Phase II loan payment of $242,967, which is then multiplied by 1.25 to reach a required loan payment allocation of $303,709 to meet the required 125% coverage factor. The initial capital cost of Phase II is then $4,542,967, which includes the cost of Phase II Improvements at $4,300,000 plus the required reserves of one year's payment of $242,967. To achieve the stated design goals, this scenario results would require implementing the planned rate increases in 2008 and 2009. These rate increases were approved in November 2004 by Resolution R04-118. This resolution is included in Appendix 8. In addition, to balance expenses and revenues by the end of the study period, a 2% rate increase would be needed in years 2010 and 2011. Th i rates are summarized in a table, below. D Summa of Pro osed Base Rates, ere uivalent meter Rates ahead a r oved Additional increases Year 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-1 1 11-12 Rate incr. Rate % incr. Rate % incr, Rate % incr. Rate % incr. Alt. i $18.07 current $21.57 19% $25.57 18.5% $25.57 0% $25.57 0% Alt. ii $18.07 current $21.57 19% $25.57 18.5% $26.08 2% $27.14 .2% The following table shows the total required to cover both current and future acquired debt in Scenario 1, as well as the capital cost of Phase I I, under the two alternatives. The debt service listed in this table includes the 125% coverage ratio. Total Capital Costs Over Study Period Alternative i - Do not set money aside now for MDT Project Current Debt Service New Debf Service Ca . Pro'ects Total 2007-$ $127,418 $127,418 2008-9 $128,985 $4,493,024* $4,622,009 2009-10 $127,794 $241,280 $369,074 2010-11 $129,286 $241,280 $370,566 2011-12 $129,419 $241,280 $370,699 V:\0703\Update WW Rate Study\Data for all scenarios\WW Rate Report.doc 12 Y' sr" Alternative ii -Setting aside money now for MDT Project Gurrent Debf Service New Debt Service Cap• Pro'ects Total 2007-8 $127,418 $127,418 2008-9 $128,985 $4,542,967* $4,671,952 2009-10 $127,794 $303,709 $431,503 2010-11 $129,286 $303,709 $432,995 2011-12 $129,419 $303,709 $433,128 "' This fi ure includes the ex ense to set aside reserve funds as re wired b the loan. B. Rate Structure Review It is recommended that review of the rate structure be conducted on a frequent basis, at least every two years, to correlate updated revenues, revenue requirements, capital improvement needs, and capital financing requirements. Although the City of Laurel may not actually change utility rates, periodic and frequent review of the City's overall financial plan and rate schedule will help the City to proactively prepare for financial needs and achieve the goals of the City. V:\0703\Update WW Rate Study\Data for all scenarios\WW Ratc Report.doc 13 1V1tll~~E, INC, An Ernplayee-Owned Company May 14, 2008 Mary Embelton City of Laurel 115 West 1St St. Laurel; MT 59044 315 N. 25th STREET • SUITE 102 • BILLINGS, MT 58101 Re: Water and Wastewater Rate S#udies Mary, ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS SCIENTISTS 406-656-6000•FAX:406.237-1201 This letter shall serve to respond to your question regarding volume charges in the Draft Water and Wastewater Rate Studies. The logic behind the approach included in these studies is described below. Draft Wastewater Rate S#udy The City of Laurel, in November of 2004, passed Resolution No. R04-117 which approved a wastewater rate structure in which the base rate would have annual increases, with no volume charge increases- The wastewater base rate increases approved by the City Council in this resolution extend up to July 1, 2009. When we met with City staff several weeks ago, the City expressed their desire to use the rate structure approved by Resolution No. R04-117, up through the July 1, 2009 base rate increase. When these currently approved increases were incorporated in our rate design, it was determined that these increases generated sufficient income to cover projected expenses, with only very small increases far 201 D and 2011 (2%) depending an haw the "funds available for capital improvements" were used. Please see the discussion in the Draft Wastewater Rate Study describing alternatives "i" and "ii" far how these "an-hand" funds will be used. For comparison of how the City of Laurel's wastewater volume charge compares to other similar sized Montana communities, please see the attached comparison, similar to the comparison which was included in the Draft Wastewater Rate Study in Appendix 9. It can be seen that the wastewater volume charge is relatively high when compared to these other communities. It should be noted that while many of the communities include 2000 or 3000 gallons in the base rate, the City of Laurel does not include any volume in the base rate. Draft Wafer Rate Study Similarly, based on comparison with other similarly sized communities, it was determined that the current volume charge far water is in the middle of the communities listed. Please see the attached comparisons, similar to those included in the Draft Water Rate Study as Appendix 9. tt can be seen that while some other "Providing rosourc~s in pc~rtn~rshi~ with clients to c~chi~v~ thoir goals" ' ~ MORRISON ~ MAIERLE, Irrc. communities do have higher volume charges, many of these communities include some amount of volume in the base rate. Since the City of Laurel does not include any volume in the base rate, it was felt that the current volume charge is reasonable: As stated in the report, comparing rates with similar sized communities can be somewhat informational, but has limited use, as many factors drive the necessary rates including geography, past planning and improvements programs, water source and wastewater discharge receiving water, treatment requirements and technologies, and many other factors. Finally, it should be noted that both studies are currently in draft form and were transmitted to the City of Laurel in November of 2007. At that time, we requested that the appropriate parties review the studies and provide input and comments. As rates can be structured differently, depending on the goals and preferences of the community, we would invite any input from the City. It would be beneficial to schedule a meeting to discuss the rates structures with City staff and council representatives so that we may finalize these studies. If the City would like to :pursue increased volume charges in order to encourage conservation or for other reasons, this is something we would be happy to discuss with staff and incorporate into the final rate designs. Please contact us to schedule a time when we may meet to discuss the City's comments on the Draft Water and Wastewater Rate studies. Should you have any comments or questions, please contact me at (406) 656-60Q0. Sincerely, MO BISON-MAIERLE, INC. Carl J. An rson, PE 2007 Communit 2000 Po BASE RATE $ 314" VOLUME CHARGE PER f 000 Gal $ TOTAL CHARGE FOR 3D00 GALLONS Ci7MMEf~lTS Colstri 2346 25.00 1.40 29.20 Na volume incuded in base Columbus fT48 6.90 1.50 6.90 Base includes 3DOD al Fors 1944 24.50 2.35 26.85 Base includes 2000 ae Hardin 3384 19.00 3.00 11.D0 Base includes 3000 al Livin ston Red Lode Roundu 6659 2977 1931 7.75 21.D0 18.92 1.59 3.77 next 5000, 4.95 next (2000 253 7.75 2f.00 18.92 Base includes 7000 al Pro sed rates, 6107 Base includes 3000 I Base includes 3000 al, den block of 2000 at 2.53, then next 1000 $9.001 Averse 16.44 2.29 t7.3T Laure! Current 6255 24.22 1.82 29.87 No volume included in base 1.361100 cu ft V:1D7031Water Rate StudylData far all water scenarioslWater Rate Comparisons 5194!2008 zoa7 Communit 2000 t'o BASE RATE $ , 314" VOLUME CHARGE PER 1,DOD Gal $ TOTAL CHARGE FOR 300D GALLONS COMMENTS Colstri 2346 14.61 1.50 19.1 i Base char a includes no consum tion Columbus 1748 17.50 1.35 21.55 Fors h 1944 21.50 2.48 23.98 2000 al included in base Hardin 3384 19.97 - 19.97 Residential, no corasum bon char e Livin ston 6851 9.67 3.22 9.67 3000 allons included in base Red Lode 2177 23.83 i.69 23.83 3000 allons included in base Raundu 1931 17.D4 1.44 17.04 3000 allons included in base Shelb 3216 15.62 1.28 19.46 Base char a includes no consum tion Avera a 17.47 1.84 19.33 Laurel =Current} f ti255 ~ 18.07 ~ 3.42 28.33 Base charge includes no consumytion ~ _ 2.56!100 cu ft = 3.4219 000 aal 1 V:lt]703lUpdate WW Rate StudylData far all scenarioslSewer Rate Comparisons ~ 5/9412008 Joanna Johnson Presenting... The idea of Laurel, Montana being a Sister Gity with the Musekee area in Thailand ...and why? Outline of Talk Thanks for giving me an opportunity to speak with you tonight! A. Background of haw 8~ why I got to Thailand in 2007 B. Introduction to Musekee area of Thailand C. Introduction to Zathansiami Ralte (also known as Delay) founder of the ministry in Musekee, which means God's Haven. Work that Delay does: C1. Cares far widows and orphans -rescues children from the child sex trade C2. Assisted local farmers with innovative ideas for irrigation C3. Instrumental in providing electricity to the hill tribes via solar panels ~ generators C4. Provided plumbing indoor /outdoor plumbing to the area D. How can we help? Practical ways to get involved: D1. Provide funding for the school by: - sponsoring 1 child at $30 per year which will provide that child with food during the school day, a school uniform, and his/her tuition paid for the year - providing books for the school's library -- helping to construct an on-site nurses station equipped with medical supplies and staff D2. Assisting the widows at Musekee by: - providing a "Fair Trade" solution for their store. They weave and sow, design clothes, quilts & stuffed animals, ~ make accessories like wallets, belts, 8~ scarves. - Enabling the widows to eam some kind of living makes it possible for the women to provide for their children and get back an their feet D3. Send volunteers from our area who are willing and able to work in their rice 1•ields and teach ESL (English as a Second Language). E. In Conclusion: Would you be interested in establishing a Sister City outreach to Musekee? E1. This is not a new idea. Montana is a sister state with the country of Japan E2. This would be a powerful way to commemorate the Centennial Celebration! Note: For further information, the Outlook will be running an article next week. Joanna will be in Thailand from May 28 -July 315`, 2008. Her contact email is: yada.raot@gmail.cam !f you should have questions, feel free to contact har or her sister here locally, Heidi du Bois. Heidi's email is: tiggerhouse@gmail.com ** Delay will be coming tv the united States in August (visiting Minnesota), and should we decide favorably on this issue, she may be able to thank you all personally by visiting us here as well! ** LAara~ ~fra DapArtrwapt .4EAE~ON # 1 A Proposal about a Cost Effective, Long-Term Solution to a growing problem. Presentation Highlights • History of the project to its current position. • What problems will this project eliminate. • The proposed building. • The proposed building site. • Fire Department numbers are telling a story. • What the department wants and why. • What is needed to continue. • Support for the project. • Answering and clarification of issues. Determining Efficiency in Fire Service Projects Efficiency in the Fire Service is rather simple, and comparable to most business models. 1. What is the need, and why. - What are the reasons? - How did they become an issue? 2. What is the benefit, and the consequences. - What is the benefit of going through with the project? - Vllhat is the consequences of not completing-the project? 3. How does it change day to day operations. - What effects will this have on you everyday and time you use it? 4. What is the cost as compared to the benefit. - Where does this project relate to other capitol projects in terms of the service you provide? 5. How does this contribute to the Holistic System Analysis of the ser--ice? - H.S.A. is the process of analyzing your Inputs against your Process and realizing what your Outputs are as compared to your desired Outcomes. What is the need, and why? • The current building was built in 1977 with an average life expectancy of 20 years which has come and gone. - Design limitations have been reached and exceeded, and its evident. • All three services currently holding residence have experienced changes to as much as 3 fold their original size. - Growth opportunities are limited due to space. • No more temporary solutions are available that are cost effective. • The city has grown and will soon be accepting Class II status, at which time changes in the fire department will be inevitable. - We want those in~ol~ed with the changes set up for success. • Complaints, arguing, and posturing over spacing has had a detrimental impact to inter-service cooperation. It is brought up and discussed nearly weekly. - "Band-Aid" type fixes are not working any longer, and personnel problems are the next foreseeable issues. What benefits could be realized? • Fire Stations are historically cheaper than most other public entity buildings. - Majority of space inside stations are un-finished or low tech as opposed to other buildings. - Frequency of use is often less detrimental to fire stations. Immense consideration given to future planning. - Growth Analysis indicators used to plan for a station that will meet fire department needs for 40+ years. - Multiple factors played into this consideration. • Elimination of current spacing concerns. - Current building could be used by other entities to expand as seen fit. - If fire department leaves the current FAP buildingg, over 8,000 square feet of s ace would become available lus cit sho and state uonset. P p Y p q • Anew, respectful, public building to match current growth and development trends. - Fire Stations are often accounted to be very public oriented buildings, where architecture, public space, and the ability to the public to enjoy and find comfort in these buildings is important. This is reflected in the design. What are the consequences of not funding the project? • Continuation of the current space concerns. - No action indicates no concern which does not solve problems. - No more temporary solutions available that are cost effective. - .Space concerns will escalate due to higher frequency of use in all three services. • Market Estimates by local account and by national guides indicate high probability of price escalation above the national scale. - Local Market Escalation Costs are 6°/a. - National Market Escalation Costs are 3°/0. • Equipment deterioration. - Equipment stored outside deteriorates quicker, especially concerning old equipment. - CIP not able to keep up with equipment replacements. • Response hindrances. - Emergency Response Equipment stored outside has to be locked, winterized which takes time remedy during emergency calls. - Storing equipment off-site also adds to additional delays in emergency response. • Multiple CIP additions as mandated by law. - Any form of a full time service will add additional constraints to current building. - Fear of having to implement a full time service at the same time as needing a new building will be a costing nigh#mare..for everyone. Breaking it Out... Pros Reduced user conflicts. 8,000 square feet becomes available for adaptation of two services. 2 storage locations become available. Custom design offers an investment strategy rather than an absolute expenditure. "Band-Aid" Fixes cease to exist. Leg-work completed with minimal cost. Growth of fire departmen# to meet service demands is given opportunity. New, professional, public building adds to the sense of growth and maturity of the community. Public space available through construction and design. Cons • Increased severity and frequency of user conflicts. • Expansion of services un-available. • Class II status dictates multiple CIP purchases, at the same time. • Property accidents increase. • Service demands increase, but cannot be met. • Invoking or requesting mills through votes not as cost effective as G.O. Bonding. • Decreased morale amongst emergency services. • "Band-Aid" type nickel and dime expenses continue. • Market escalation rises 3-6°I° annually. • Design and functionality reduced due to cost and urgency. Why not a Satellite Station? • There are no factors of significance that support the development of a satellite station. - Call Volume, Response Times, Staffing, Call Locations and patterns, Size of fleet, due not support satellite development. - Call patterns do not indicate service "hot-spo#s". - Industry accepted practice is 5 miles or 10 minutes drive. • Satellite development is not supported by growth patterns or plans. - The city area is not growing, nor is it going to grow enough in the foreseeable future for a satellite. • Governing models do not promote satellite de~eloprnent. - The largest growth is outside of city limits, in the dis#rict areas. - The current governance model does not promote healthy expansion opportunities unless annexed. - District size (110 square miles} offers little satellite development opportunities. Satellite Station contd. • Fire operations do not support the development of a satellite station. - If you build a satellite station, you have to staff it. - The f re department is averaging 2.4 applications per opening. - Subdivisions in rural areas cannot staff fire stations. - Learning lessons from other services, it takes more time to respond to a satellite station, gear and respond back to the call. - The department does not have equipment #hat is not currently in use, therefore storing off site at an un-manned station is prohibitive of response time goals. • Satellite development will cost as well. - Satellite developments would realistically cost well over half of the central station. • The cost to benefit ratio does not fit. - The cost of the lot, construction, tapping fee's etc. do not provide a high benefit to the citizens. • Satellite Stations do not fit the departments goals and objectives. The Proposed Building • Current Design was initiated by the department's own programming study. - Programming study conducted over 2-month time span added a custom design and functionality over and above common studies. - independent study saved between $5,000-$~ 0,000, but was applauded by CTA. - Study was based upon current and predicated needs using available data once analyzed. • CTA welcomed the study, it saved money, and additional support for the project became available with site plans and drawings. - Initial budget would have provided only the study, bu# with contribution is provided a genera! .site plan, lot identification, and conceptual drawings. • Building designed with intentions of 40+ years of use by both volunteer and paid staff. - Building design gave consideration to what the department would need to look like in 40 years, then the design was made. - Likelihood of some sort of paid service weighed heavily. - Desire to have one, centrally located, f re sta#ion also was a primary factor. • Built with intentions that this building would serve as the primary fire station for the City of Laurel and the 4 Rural Fire Districts. - Fire Department has a wide and diverse customer base beyond the city limits. - Funding, governing models, and performance measurements do not support the need or functionality for satellite stations in the near future. Building Contd. • Consideration given to the lot with respect to hazards etc. - Lot suits the building (Primary Concept} - Multiple site visits and analysis were conducted and programming study address's hazards adequately. • Consideration given to applicable NFPA and ISO regulations concerning community fire stations and public buildings. - I~FPA and ISO have existing considerations for community fire stations. These were addressed. Consideration given to providing public opportunity within the building. - Fire stations are public spectacles. - Public use space given heavy consideration due to this expectation. - Public need also given consideration • Building designed to provide options, not dic#ate needs. - Building is designed to provide multiple options for staffing, equipment, response, recovery, and maintenance. - Versatility will save money in the long-term. - Purposely designed to be an investment, not dust a necessary expenditure. • Building was designed to provide only necessities, but be sufficient. - There are no un-necessary rooms, space, etc. - Functionality has to be given priority in order to be an investment rather than an expenditure. - If functionality is decreased, so is the feasible life span, and the likelihood that additions etc. would be requested mid-life of the building. The Proposed Building Site • Concepts of building design and site location. - Lots have to fit building design. - Lots also have to comply with applicable NFPA and ISO regulations and standards. - Lots need to be strategically picked to be a contribution to the fire departments main customer, the citizens. • Consequences of poor determinations. - Sacrificing design for location or pricing reduces functionality of the building which costs more in the long-term. - Functionality of the fire department to the citizens Fs reduced. • Current lot was picked by factorial evidence. - Desired Pots has the necessary attributes for a emergency service lot. • Hazards have been identified and mitigation actions can be implemented. - Hazards are inherent in every choice. - Desired lot has been analyzed to determine hazards and mitigation items are awaiting implementation upon purchase. Building Site Contd. • Lots need to be sized based upon a rating scale. - Size • Sized according to desired building. • Sized for expansion if desired. • Sized for parking etc. - Location • Location relevant to Primary routes of travel. • Location in relation to building and business districts. • Location in relation to residential districts. • Centrally located within response districts. • Centrally located within volunteer base. - Implementation Plan • Does the site fit into the overall fire department's plan. - Hazards • Vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and what type. • Other hazards as identified • What mitigations need to take place. - Site Development • What type of development needs to happen and of what cost. • Roads • Fire Hydrants • Water, Sewer, and Gas Tap Fees etc. • Proximity to Electrical Comparing Building Locations 8~~' A ven u e • Larger Space. • Not centrally located. Street Reconstruction. • Longer Response Times. • Off-center from volunteer base. • Residential Neighborhood. • Tapping fees for utilities development. • Soil concerns. • Ground water concerns. • Growth Plan not supported. • Poor vehicle accessibility. • Removed from commercial districts. • Near a grade school. Noah ~St Q ire. • Smaller Space. • Less developmental fees. • Centrally located. • Central to volunteer base. • Accessibility for vehicle travel is good. • Commercially zoned. • State highway offers response options. • Near a high school. • Feasibility from a fire response perspective is high. • The lot fits the conceptual plan the best. • Feasibility from fire response perspective is poor. Numbers Tell the Story and Indicate Actions. • More in-depth performance analysis and performance measurement will be conducted. - Increased range of performance measurements will begin being recorded. - Performance measurements often developed based upon industry accepted standards and evaluations. • Numbers drive fire services. - Numbers dictate everything from budgets to insurance ratings to legal evidence. - Number are the only proven way to generate factual evidence for fire services. Performance Measurement • 5-Year Analysis • Average Calf Volume: + 25.0°I° • Average Response Times: + 48.5°/fl • Average Staffing: - 22.3°/0 X2.4 Employees} • Average Labor Hours: +28.36°/0 Average Dollar Loss: + 158.0°/° • 3-Year Analysis • Average Call Volume: + ? 7.3% • Average Response Times: + 7.5% • Average Staffing: + 17.4°/0 X1.4 Employees} • Average Labor Hours: + 22.3 • Average Dollar Loss: + 214.0% • 1-Year Comparison • Average Call Volume: + 51.1 °I° 90 X08}142 X07} • Average Response Times: + 12.0°/0 • Average Staffing: Data Unavailable Average Labor Hours: Data Unavailable • Average Dollar Loss: Data Unavailable What is important to the fire department...and why. • The fire department has not grown, yet the demands have. - There have been no additions to the fleet since 1994. - There have been no additions to the roster since 2000. - Fleet Average Age is 1982, well outside of industry standards. - Budgetary and governing models have not changed the early 1990's - Opportunities to grow cannot be supported. - Administrative burden is growing. • We are not the only ones who need to know about the challenges on the horizon. - We see the challenges, but we shouldn't be the only ones. - The public needs to know what the department is going through, they receive the service. • Professionalism supports development. - The fire service areas are experiencing growth. - The department is not. - Professionalism supports and promotes growth within communities. The fire department is a part of that. - Recruiting and Retention of volunteer members depends upon professionalism. People want to be a part of something, not just anything. Important and Why Cont'd... • The Department has put the time and effort into the "legwork" because of the need. • The Fire Department understands the need, and did something about it. • Resources were used from within the department that saved time, money, and put a custom design and personal touch to the design and lot choice. • Who better to do the work. • The Department would like to see a change. • As stated, #here has been Tittle change other than the amount of work and the faces that do it. • History of the department is to set incoming generations up for success. • Volunteers do not need additional challenges. • Cramped quarters, arguing and bickering aver spaces, in-action over quality equipment and indecision are all detractions from our departments goal of encouraging volunteerism, cooperation, and upward leadership. • Volunteers have nothing to lose when they make a decision to leave, the department is the only one that suffers, not to mention the citizens. • There are viable options, and the department realizes that. y What is Needed to Continue? • The majority of the "Legwork" is completed. • Conceptual drawings and studies are completed. • Waiting on additional guidance to complete additional work. • Subsequent, decision-based, actions will be needed. • Building lot decision needs to be made. People are waiting on us. • Lot decision may dictate additional conceptual drawings if location has been changed. • Same lot decision will indicate the need to move forward with design plans. • Funding needs to be figured. General Obligation Bvnds need to be explored more thoroughly. • Timeline would help. • Staying on track is important #o the fire department, there are many other projects requiring attention as well. • There are challenges to this bond, if approved by the council. Other bonds and mill increases are scheduled to be on the ballot soon. Support for the Project. • Fire Department has planning fora "Project Media Plan" in place. - Partial funding a possibility from grants. - Media plan would include audio, visual, public presentations, tours, and packet distribution. - Being available to the public to discuss this is important. - Public Image is the number one reason for failure i~n fire station bonding, from polling sources. • Support from the council and districts is critical. - Haying everyone on the same page would give the public more comfort that the funding and implementation for the project is being handled professionally and with respect to them. - Districts are a major user of the department ~+ 50°/0 of calls} and would appreciate the inclusion. a i < <y Questions and Clarifications? • Where to turn.... - Fire Chief. - Fire Station Programming Study.* - Conceptual Drawings.* - 2007 Year End Report.* - NFPA and ISO websites available. -Site Visits to the proposed sites and the current building. * Indicates the documents are an attachment to this presentation.