Laserfiche WebLink
UNAPPROVED <br /> • <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> Regular Meeting-August 28, 1995 <br /> 6 <br /> 1 fund for future work on the system. Additional costs include options of going with a radio <br /> 2 read system rather than a phone read which would cost $25.00 plus staff is proposing <br /> 3 adding a quarterly charge (approximately$15.00)to read the meter. If a resident will not <br /> 4 allow the change over to be made, they will be charged an additional $50.00 per quarter. <br /> 5 <br /> 6 MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Blanchard to recommend that the Council accept Option <br /> 7 #1 and award the RFP from WaterPro to conduct the install the proposed water meter <br /> 8 change out, authorize a loan from the Special Projects fund in the amount of$500,000, <br /> 9 the utilization of$330,000 from the WAC fund to pay for the capital expense of the <br /> 10 equipment, and transferring both amounts to account#700-3961 Transfers from other <br /> 11 funds, amend the Water Fund Budget account#700-396' Transfers from other funds by <br /> 12 adding $830,000, and add $830,000 to account#700-4123-703 Water Infrastructure <br /> 13 Program for that amount, institute a quarterly meter charge on all meters based on Option <br /> 14 #1, authorize meter reading charge of$15.00, for optional radio read, authorize $50.00 <br /> 15 reading charge for any resident failing to allow the meter change out, and to authorize the <br /> 16 Director of Public Works to sign all change orders up to two percent (2%) of the <br /> 17 projected project cost, to be funded from the WAC fund. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 Ms. Hankner stated she feels by investing in this particular system the city will not be in a <br /> 20 situation of upgrading it in the near future as they would if they were to go with Option <br /> 21 #2. The financing has been worked out and this is the most cost effective route of the <br /> 22 options before the council. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Ms. Trude stated she disagrees with Ms. Hankner's view that Option#1 is the most cost- <br /> 25 effective system. It costs 40% more than the next alternative. She has a hard justifying <br /> 26 charging each resident an additional $3.00 per quarter for an indefinite period of time. <br /> 27 She stated it is difficult to buy a system that has a useful life of about 25 years and it takes <br /> 28 almost that amount of time to pay it off The second option is not something that needs <br /> 29 to be upgraded. Mounds View is ideally set up for touch read system as the houses are <br /> 30 located close together. The communities that have gone to a phone read system have <br /> 31 done it out of necessity. Their homes are one to five acre lots. <br /> 32 <br /> 33 At this time, Ms. Trude stated she cannot justify going to anything more than the touch <br /> 34 read system which meets the needs of the staff, city council and residents. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Mayor Linke stated the system will be paid for in twelve years, not 25 years as stated by <br /> 37 Ms. Trude. He would like to express his support of Ms. Hankner's motion. He feels that <br /> 38 for the city residents and staff, Option#1 is the best way to go. <br /> 39 <br /> 40 Mr. Quick asked Mr. Brager, Finance Director, how much he pays for system <br /> 41 repair/replacement as a resident of the City of New Brighton. <br /> 42 <br /> 43 Mr. Brager noted that this is based upon the water consumption each quarter. Assuming <br /> 44 it is 21,000 gallons per quarter, he would pay$9.00 for sewer and $8.50 for water each <br /> 45 quarter. This is in addition to the water charge. <br />