HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 25 1994 CM15
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 25, i99~
Minutes of regular meeting held at city municipal building,
January 25, 1994.
Present: Mayor John O. Cotant, Council members Steven M. England,
W. Dean Wood, Marvin C. Gunter, Attorney Thomas J. Holmes,
Public Works Director Steven M. Smart and City Clerk Ron C.
Conlin. Councilman Leroy S. Quick was excused.
Meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Cotant.
INVOCATION was given by Bishop Dennis Stoddard, 48th. Ward, Tyhe~
Stake, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mayor Cotant asked for corrections or
additions to regular meeting minutes of January 11, 1994.
Councilman Wood moved to approve regular meeting minutes of
January il, 1994 as read. Councilman England seconded. All
council members present, voted in favor of motion.
members voted in favor of motion.
ORDINANCE - Adding Chapter 10.2Q, "Resident only parking permit
areas" to the Chubbuck Municipal Code, designating portions
of Victor Ave., Teton St. and Bonanza Ave. as permit only
parking areas.
City Clerk Conlin was directed to send residents across from
Cotant Park a copy of the ordinance, inviting them to comment
at tonight's Council Meeting.
Mayor Cotant read the ordinance in full, for the second
reading.
Charles Myers, 4646 Teton expressed concern this ordinance
might take care of problems in front of his home and homes
facing the park, but, the ordinance will make people park
further into the subdivision causing parking problems for
residents not facing the park, can this ordinance include
those people also. Mr. Myers asked if there can be more
parking opened up to the south of the park.
Councilman England suggested most of the problems are caused
by people not wanting to walk any more than they have to.
Councilman England stated the south end of the park is owned
by the School District.
17
ORDINANCE - PARKING PERMIT - (cont.)
David Robinson, 4654 Teton agreed people will not walk any
further than they have to.
Reed Morrison, 4708 Teton, felt a lot of the problem could be
taken care of with more police in area, both daytime and
night. There is considerable speeding in area. Mr. Morrison
suggested a lot of parents take two cars, when they could car
pool.
City should check with Church, make sure it is okay for
baseball and soccer people to park in their lot, if so, advise
baseball and soccer officials, so they can advise parents,
etc.
After discussion, the Council decided to table the ordinance
until the February 8, 1994 Council Meeting.
ORDINANCE Amending Section 15.40.010, new commercial use of
existing property; to clarify when the ordinance is effective
and to further clarify said ordinance is not applicable to any
transfer where the use of the property does not change.
Attorney Holmes read ordinance in full for the second reading.
Council decided to table the ordinance until the February
1994 Council Meeting,
ORDINANCE #404 Amending Chapter 18.12.030 (I), of the Chubbuck
Municipal Code to require paved driveway connecting the public
right of way with any required off-street parking spaces, to
require appropriate striping.
Councilman England read Ordinance #404 in full for the 3rd.
and final resding.
Councilman England moved to adopt Ordinance #404 as read.
Councilman Gunter seconded. Roll Call Vote: Quick, absent;
England, yes; Wood, yes; Gunter, yes.
ORDINANCE #405 - Amending Section 18.12.03 (L) to allow a Class III
Production Building to be used as a production building sales
office.
Councilman Gunter read Ordinance #405 in full for the 3rd. and
final reading.
19
ORDINANCE #405 - (cont.)
Councilman Gunter moved to adopt Ordinance #405 as read.
Councilman Wood seconded. Roll Call Vote: Quick, absent;
England, yes; Wood, yes; Gunter, yes.
ORDINANCE Amending
temporary signs;
signs.
Chapter 15.24 to provide limitations
to provide for a permit for temporary
on
Councilman Wood read ordinance in full for the second reading.
Councilman England asked if home sale signs would be affected
by this ordinance, if so can they be exempted.
Political signs are not affected.
Council decided to table the ordinance, until the February 8,
1994 Council Meeting.
ORDINANCE #406 - An ordinance enacting a moratorium on permitted
Industrial uses in any Industrial Land Use District lying
within the area described as beginning at the north right of
way of Interstate 15, then north parallel to and lying 800
feet either side of the railroad tracks to the northern most
point of the City being south of Siphon Rd.; provided any such
permitted industrial Uses within such area must apply for a
conditional use permit.
Attorney Holmes read Ordinance #406 in full for the first
reading.
Councilman England moved to dispense with the rule requiring
Ordinance ~406 to be read on three separate days. Councilman
Gunter seconded. Roll Call Vote: Quick, absent; England, yes;
Wood, yes; Gunter, yes.
Councilman Wood moved to adopt Ordinance #406 as read.
Councilman England seconded. Roll Call Vote= Quick, absent;
England, yes; Wood, yes; Gunter, yes.
DAYCARE FACILITY APPLICATIONS H. Wayne Robinson, Mother Goose
Pre-School & Daycare, 420 W. Chubbuck Rd. and Nelda Kugler,
Just for Kids, 4801 Whitaker Rd. have applied for license to
operate day care centers.
Police Department suggested approval of licenses.
DAYCARE PACILITY APPLICATIONS - (cont.)
21
Councilman Gunter moved to approve Day Care Facility Licenses
to H. Wayne Robinson, Mother Goose Pre-School & Daycare, 420
W. Chubbuck Rd. and Nelda Kugler, Just for Kids at 4801
Whltaker Rd. Councilman Wood seconded. All council members
present voted for motion.
RESOLUTION #1-94 -SANITATION RATE INCREASE A resolution of the
City, amending the rates to be charged by the City of garbage
collection provided through the municipal sanitary service
system.
Councilman England moved to adopt Resolution #1-94 as
presented. Councilman Wood seconded. All council members
present voted in favor of motion.
WATER RATES AND NEW PRODUCTION WELLS - PWD Smart presented
spreadsheet analysis of the water rates and the cost of
three test wells and two new production wells.
a
PWD Smart said three test wells are estimated at $59,000.00
each, the two production wells are estimated at $44,600.00
each, for a total of $504,000.00. The Judicial confirmation
will be approx. $4,000.00, bond counsel is approx. $5,000.00
for a grand total of $516,000.00.
PWD Smart said we have sufficient funding in other line items
to use temporarily so we can get the test wells underway. PWD
Smart suggested we go to Judicial confirmation and sell a bond
for the total amount as soon as we possibly can.
PWD Smart stated he computed the water rates using the budget,
including the annual cost of well loan money, we should adjust
our water rates to $9.5~ per month minimum, and $0.70 per
thousand gallons.
Stanley Jenkins, 6002 Eden asked why the City of Chubbuck~s
Water, Sewer and Sanitation rates went from $23.80 to $38.60
in approx, seven years.
Councilman England explained getting new computer models have
made us realize we were not using accurate figures to
establish rates.
Discussion about Depreciation Funds accumulated for purchase
of worn out equipment to operate the City.
WATER RATES, TEST WELLS AND NEW PRODUCTION WELLS - (cont.)
PW~ Smart stated he received the following professional
services, for test wells quotes:
CH2M HiLL
KELLER ASSOCIATES
21,000.00
$ 21,000.00
PWD Smart stated professional services do not have to go out
for bid. These people will put together the specifications so
we can advertise the wells for bid.
Considerable discussion about installation of a secondary
water system in the City·
PWD Smart stated if a secondary system is the way to go, we
need to prepare standards, etc., then adopt an ordinance
requiring new developments to install the secondary system.
Councilman England moved to, I) Authorize Mayor Cotant to
enter into contract with consultant. 2) Authorize Staff to get
going on the Judicial Confirmation and Bond Counsel.
3) Authorize preparation of a resolution increasing water
rates to be presented at the February 8, 1994 Council Meeting.
Councilman Wood seconded. All council members present voted
in favor of motion.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
PWD Smart stated he received the completed contracts from
the State on Chubbuck Rd. & Hlilne Rd. intersection
improvements, PWD Smart will send to consultant, the
engineer will have 120 days to complete the engineering on
the pro3ect. By fall, the pro3ect should be ready to go to
contract.
Charles Myers, 4646 Teton asked if street lights on Victor
St. can be repaired, Mr. Myers was directed to report the
address to City Office.
Charles Myers, 4646 Teton complained about baseballs
hitting his pickup on Teton, even though the backstop
states "no one over the age of 12 can play on the field",
teenagers and some adults do it anyway. City will put
additional signs up on the field.
CLAIMS - Computer print-out claims
Council.
25
presented to Mayor Cotant
and
Councilman Wood moved to approve computer print-out claims as
presented. Councilman Gunter seconded. All council members
present voted in favor of motion.
At 10:I7 p.m., Councilman England moved, Councilman Gunter
seconded, with full council approval to adjourn meeting.
~ohn O. Cotant, Mayor
Ron C. Conlin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM ~ ' '
TO: Mayo~, ~ity Council
FROM: Steven M. Smart
DATE: January 25, 1994
RE: Water rates and new production wells.
I have prepared a spreadsheet analysis of the water rates and the
cost of three test wells and two new production wells. The
spreadsheet of the cost of wells is shown as Table 1. You can see
that three test wells are estimated at $59~100.00 and two
production wells are estimated at $44,600.00 for a total of
$504,000.00. I have also estimated judicial confirmation at
$7~000.00 and bond counsel at $5,000.00 for a grand total of
$516,000.00. I have computed the annual cost for this capital
improvement using an interest rate of 8% using a term length of 10,
15, 20 or 30 years. I used the 15 year term length for the
remainder of the computations in the water rates.
We have sufficient funding in other line items to use temporarily
and get the test wells underway. We should go to judicial
confirmation and sell a bond for the total amount as soon as we
possibly can. You probably noticed in the latest City report that
the legislature is considering eliminating judicial confirmation
from the Idaho Code. Judicial confirmation is a legal process that
cities can go through that would allow the judiciary to confirm
that the proposed expenditure is ordinary and necessary for the
operation of the enterprise system. Thus~ allowing the cities to
go out and pledge revenues against a loan without having to have a
bond election.
I have computed the water rates using the budget without new
production wells and find that we should charge $9.00 per month
minimum plus $0.60 per thousand gallons. This is an increase of
$0.10 per thousand gallons. When I include the annual cost of well
loan money which I estimated at $61,000.00 we need to adjust our
rates $9.50 per month minimum and $0.70 per thousand gallons.
D!TY OF £:HUBBUCK
NEW ~-~mr~.'~.~-'-n~.~ .~ I ~ COST ESTIM~,E
SMS 1-19-94
WELLCOST
TEST WELLS:
DRILLING
SAMPLING/TESTING:
ABANDON:
ENGINEERING;
UNIT COST COST FOR
THREE
$1D,O00.O0 $S0,000.00
$Z,SOO.O0 $4,5E0.00
$i,000.00 S3,000.00
$21,600.00
$12,500.00 $59~100.00
PRODUCTION WELLS:
DRILLING:
PROPERTY:
ENGINEERING;
PUMP, MOTOR,
BUILDING:
UNII COST COST FOR
TWO
$90,000.00 $180,000.00
$4,000.00 SB,O00.O0
$16,200.00
ELECTRI $95,000.00 $i90,000.00
$25,000.00 $50,000.00
WATER RIGHT APPLICAT $200.00 $400.00
$214,200.00 $444,600.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST FOR 3 TEST WELLS
AND TWO PRODUCTION WELLS;
LOAN/BOND COSTS:
JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION:
BONO COUNSEL:
TOTAL:
$505,700.00
$7,000.00
$5,000.00
$515,700.00
ANNUAL COST OF WELL CONSTRUCTION COST:
AT INTEREST RATE (APR, ~):
TERM LENGTH (YEARS):
8.00
10
15
2O
3O
$76,854.51
$60,249.00
$52,525.18
$45,808.31
[TY DF CHUBBUCK WATER RATES RNALYBIS
~E-EXIRR CAPACITY METHDD WORKSHEET - PAGE I DF 2
!i,KLi3
LINE
ALLOCAT20N OF BUDGET EXPENSES
*~$EXIRR CAPRCI~ ~ **'~CUSTO?~ER CD>TS~*~
TOiAL BASE MAXIMUM MRXTMUH METERS & BILLING
COOl COST DAY HOUR SERVICES
IDMiH./ACCTG/BILLG: $2~,B~4.00
$4B,500.00
$13,?00,00 $6,850,00
RAKOKiSS!o~/rBIDRAGE$1G2,1B~,O0 $40,53B,00
DISTRIBUTION $2B,550,00 $12,775.00
3OUIPMENT/VEH]CLES $70,575.00 $21,172.50
$1~5,462,5~ $3B,233,18
$35,017,00
$6,B$0,00
$16,215,20 $64,860,80 $40,53B.00
$12,T75.00
$45,B7~.75 $3,525.75
$570,371.00 $171,016.18 $16,215.20 $106,727.80 $254,649.29 $4L,762.53
:USTDMER CLASS
UNITS DF SERVICE ALLOCATION
********************** *******************************************************_**************************
ANNUAL AVERAGE PEAKIRG TOTAL EXTRA ~EAKING TOTAL EXTRA METERS &
USE RAlE FACTOR CAPACIIY CAPACIlY FACTOR CAPACIIT CAPACITY SERVICES
k ~al k 8pd k 8pd k ODd k ~pd k ODd
~ILLS
O~STRIAL 0 1.00
TOTALS:
13
IETERED YATER ALLONEO PER MONI~ PER EDU!V. NETEP:
TOTAL WATER ANNUAL USE lES8 ALLOWED WATER:
UNIT COSTE OF SERVICE
lOYAL BASE
COST
(~zzEXTRR GRPACITTz~z){~:~zE:UBTOP, EF; COSTSZ:zz) DIP, ECl
MAX, DAY MAX, HSm'JP METERS ~ BiLLiNG & F~R~ PROTECT
SERVICES COLLECTING SERY1CE
DF SERVICE: 584394 2457 4970 2489 25256
units: k gal k gpd k gpd e~uiv.meters b~lls
BUDGET EXPENSES: $570,~7i.00 $171.016.18 $I6,215.20 $106,727.80 $2&4,649,29
cost (S/unit): $0.4449 $6,5990 $2],47G0 $94,2745 $],6549
)ASE-EXTRA CAPACITY METHOD WORKSHEET - PAGE 2 OF 2
~ESIGN OF ~IM]MUN MONTHLY COSlS
CUSTOMER COSTS: MEIER SIZE - S/8 ~ &/i resid~ntiml
i~LIHG & COL[ECIlH~
fflH. JSOHTHLY CHAP, GE:
per month
............ per month
3LUMITRiC BASE AHD EXIRA CAPACITY COSTS:
~ COIT ~ $0.44 per kg!l $0.4~ per kgal-mo
DAY EX CAP COST~ $6,6D per kgpd
EX FACTOR i.~B
per kg&l-mo
!AX HR EX CAF: COST8 $2i,4B pmr kgpd
EX CAP FACTOR 3.60
IOIAL ¥OLUMETRIC CHAR6E:
$0.2i per kgs~-mo
$0.6~ per kgal-mo
METER SIZE
MIHIMUM ~ONTHL¥ CHARGES BY ~ETER SIZE
EQUZV FACTOR ~OHTHLY MONTHLY !OTAL MONTHL ALLOWED
BY FLOW BASE ¢~AR~E B]~ING CHRG BASE CHARGE WATER
5/8x~/4, 3/4 1.000 ?.B6 1.65 g.51 4.00
I inch 1.667 1),10 1.65 1(.75 6,00
1.5 inch &.~22 25,31 1.65 26.97 12.00
2 inch B.OB& )~.g~ 1.65 41.5g ~0.00
~ inch 10.77B 84.~1 1.65 8~,~ 4~.00
4 inch 1%778 139.67 1.65 141.)2 71.00
6 inch )6,111 28~.T0 .1.65 2BB,)5 144.00
8 inch 56,667 445.1~ 1,65
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayo~ Cotant, City Council
FROM: Steven M. Smart
January 21, 1994
DATE:
RE: Sanitation rates.
We have successfully converted to Snake River Sanitation for our
commercial container refuse collection. I have analyzed the rates
to determine what charges we should assess against the commercial
customers. As >ou recall from our council discussion in November
there is really no savings in expenses realized by this
privatization. My final rate analysis shows that it is slightly
more expensive.
Snake River Sanitation (SRS) has determined their rates on a
different basis than we. I have had to make some modifications in
my own rate model to make everything work out. Our contract with
SRS is strictly to provide containers and dump and haul solid waste
from the containers to the landfill. We are still obligated to pay
to the County $177,000.00 a year on the landfill construction as
well as bill and collect and perform other sanitation services in
the City. The City needs to charge the customers over and above
the SRS charges in order to pay for those services.
I have taken the sanitation budget and eliminated all expenses
related to the commercial container aspect of the operation I have
reduced the salaries by a proportional amount and eliminated every
charge that we feel we can. You will see on he budget that I have
indicated by each line item whether or not the line item should be
included in the base cost, time cost, weight cost, etc. Figure 2
is the rate design work sheet for the sanitation department based
on the budget shown in figure 1. You will see that I have
separated out the landfill construction costs (177,060.00) and put
it entirely into the weight portion. This fee, I feel, should be
charged in proportion to the amount of the landfill used by the
various customers. I have also separated out bags and the SRS
collection charges and put them in separate items in the rate
design work sheet.
Since SRS uses different sized containers and dumps them once or
twice a week I have chosen the common denominator of "cubic yards
dumped" for the rate model. As shown in figure 2 the City will
need to charge $2].40 per month per "cubic yard dumped" weekly plus
a once a month charge of $4.00 to the commercial customers. Figure
3 is a table showing how the charges now compare to earlier charges
when the City did both collection and hauling. The last column,
column L, in figure 3 shows the difference in charges between when
the City did all of the collection and hauling and the charges now
under the private hauling contract and the rate model I have used
to develop rates.
Page 1 of 2
This rate analysis (Table 2) also shows that we need to charge our
residential customers $12.80 per month. This is $0.20 Rreater than
our current charge. I believe the change is a result of my
handling of the bag cost. Earlier rate models included the bags in
the weight portion and were distributed between both commercial and
residential customers. Commercial customers would have carried
about 42% of the cost of the bags, but I have now put the bags all
in the responsibility of the bag customers.
I have prepared a rate resolution adjusting sanitation rates by the
amounts shown in this rate design model. If .~'ou have ant questions
regarding this please feel free to contact me at the City offices.
Page 2 of 2
~ SMALL UTiLiTY SA~]IATIOM RATE
BUDGET LIME TOTAL BASE TIME WEIGHi BAGS SAS COLLECT2
5 $ $ 5 $ CHARGE $
BASE CUSiDMER COSTS:
TOTAL CUS!LKERb,
NORTHLY SASE CHA~GE:
PER CUSTOMER
~E..ZDE~.,IAL/uR~ CUSTONEF, COSi5:
!00% OF TiME $: $55,056.00
57,5~ DE WEZGkT $: 5!07,458,87
BA~S ~: $S5,000,00
TOTAL:
ko, OF RES/BAG CUSTO
HOMTHLY RES/BAG CHaR 58,82
IOiAL RES,/BAG NORTHLY CHARGE:
C:GM~ERC]AL COR,~IR~R COSTS:
0% OF TIME 5: 50,00
42,5% OF WEIGHT 5: 579,426,iS
SRS COLLEOTIDR 5:
TOTAL:
CONTAINER VOLUME (CY ~?0
,~R H~, CDHI, CHRG 521.3] PER CY
CDNHEROZAL CONTA]MEF SERViCE MONTH? CHARGE:
$2,.~. PER CY DUMPED
$3.94 PER MONTH