Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/2010 Work Session CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Mayor Gary l.. Peterson Councilmembers Robert A. Witham 590 40 Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 -3878 (763)706 -3600 TDD (763) 706 -3692 Bruce Nawrocki Tanunera Drehm Visit our website at: www.dcolumbia-heiRlittmn.us Bruce Kel_enherg City Manager Waller R. F•ehst ADMINISTRATION NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING * * * * * * * * * * ** to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: Meeting of: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL Date of Meeting: MONDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2010 Time of Meeting: 7:00 P.M. Location of Meeting: CONFERENCE ROOM 1 Purpose of Meeting: WORK SESSION 1. Refuse Service Contract Amendments 2. Sanitary Sewer Collection District 2: I/I report and analysis (Televising Update) 3. 2011 Budget review The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 763 - 706 -3611 to make arrangements. (TDD /706 -3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only) CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: AGENDA SECTION: Work session discussion ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS / BY: K. Hansen BY: � _, ITEM: Refuse service contract amendments DATE: DATE: Background: The City entered into a new five -year Refuse & Recycling contract with Veolia ES that begun on January 1, 2010. The contract, ordinance, and process for providing service was modeled off the prior contract and remained virtually the same. In April 2010, a new article to the City Code for Refuse and Recycling service was added which consolidated various paragraphs into a single article under Municipal Services. A few major changes were implemented in both the contract and ordinance: • Recycling was changed to single -sort utilizing carts vs. boxes and allowing alley collection for recycling. • Yard waste can only be disposed of in "compostable" bags as directed by a state law that took effect on January 1, 2010. • Solid waste disposal costs are based on actual tons disposed and charged directly to the City; the contractor is paid only for providing and emptying containers, and hauling to an approved disposal site. • Curbside recycling revenue is now shared with the City -- receiving rebates from the contractor for 60% of commodity value. Major items that remained the same: • Full service households can still dispose of large household items such as furniture, beds, etc. and also up to three 90- gallon carts worth of trash. • Limited 60 or 30- gallon service only have trash within the container taken, and extra items are provided separately of the contract. • Multi - dwelling units' service only have trash within the container taken, but can dispose of large household items. • Senior rate (income qualified) service is treated as "Full Service ". • All residential properties receive recycling as part of a service package. • Yard waste disposal service is provided as a service package for non - Multiple Dwelling properties (3 or less units). • All residential properties can dispose of one appliance per year without extra fees. This does not include electronics. Analysis /Conclusions: Issues noted with the current process for Municipal provided refuse and recycling services. 1. The new yard waste bag law has caused unforeseen hardships on residents because of the high price for the appropriate bags. An option would be to utilize contractor supplied containers or carts instead of bags. Standardized containers provided by Veolia are safe and easy for the operator to handle and can eliminate hazards to the operator. The carts must also be the correct size and dimensions for Veolia's equipment to lift and dump (the only way Veolia will provide the service). This service was not part of the original RFP and will require an amendment to the contract. 2. The recycling single -sort carts are very convenient, but also easier for some to utilize as an extra garbage can (equating to approximately one -third the cost of another garbage cart). When used as a secondary garbage container, the contractor should leave the cart alone to be emptied with trash increasing disposal costs without revenue. If it is inappropriately dumped with the recycling, this contaminates the recycling material and reduces its value. 3. The City now pays directly for solid waste disposal at $52 /ton and has a vested interest in reducing solid waste annual volumes. Currently we rely on the contractor to ensure the refuse /recycling operator (field personnel) does not take trash or items above a given service level. However, in reality, when extra garbage above the service level limit is placed out for collection it is usually collected if bagged properly. Currently the City pays for the disposal of this extra garbage, but does not have an extra service fee process to recoup the cost of doing so. It is also confusing for residents with limited service to dispose of large bulky items as they must take the extra steps of calling the contractor prior to collection and paying up front. This causes furniture and mattresses, etc. to stay on the ground until the resident conducts this process properly. When the contractor does provide extra service for a fee, such as furniture collection for limited service properties, the material is still loaded on the truck with the rest of the City's refuse and weighed at the disposal site. Subtracting the weights for the extra material is total guesswork. Illegal dumping also occurs from time to time, requiring the City to collect and pay for disposal of the refuse items. Proposed contract amendments and process changes: 1. Staff has met with Veolia and they have agreed to provide yard waste carts to the City for an extra fee (around $4 /month) on an annual subscription. This fee can be incorporated into the current recycling and yard waste charges to residents, upon request by residents for the yard waste cart service. In addition, the refuse contractor has noticed some properties have excessive yard waste for the size of the property and has requested a limit on the amount collected at any one time. Staff recommends an amendment to the contract that establishes the charges for carts. Veolia will conduct a study on amounts of yard waste collected next spring to determine if a limit should be considered. The cart would still need to be emptied at the street curb vs. the alley to prevent overcrowding of the alley with carts and to prevent having another truck drive down the alleys. 2. Probably the most egregious abuse of our refuse system is when the recycling cart is utilized as a garbage cart. Staff believes this should be a penalty vs. an extra service charge. A penalty charge can be invoiced separately by the City to the refuse account holder. To educate properties where this is occurring, the contactor would first notify the resident of contamination issues and provide information for proper preparation of recycling. If the problem continues, staff recommends a $50 penalty charge for each occurrence. Veolia has requested reimbursement from the City approximately $20 for each extra refuse collection, as a truck must be diverted off its route, increasing the daily collection times. A resolution establishing the penalty amount may be considered as ordinance 4.704 RECYCLING GENERAL REQUIREMENTS provides "If the service provider determines a recycling container is too contaminated with non - recyclable materials, the service provider may collect the material as refuse. Collection of contaminated recycling materials can be provided by the service provider at an additional cost to the resident." An amendment to the contract to establish the charges would be needed. 3. In order to streamline removal of extra refuse (above a given service level) that is properly placed out for disposal, staff proposes two options for a new process. A resolution amending the contract on this process, establishing an extra garbage fee (per 30- gallon bag), and bulky items fee as charged by the contractor to the City may be considered as the ordinance 4.703 GARBAGE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS provides "Collection of materials outside of the provided container (other than previously noted) can be provided by the service provider at an additional cost to the owner." a. The refuse contractor takes all extra garbage and bulky items that is obviously left for collection and reports to and invoices the City for properties where this occurs. The City will then bill the refuse account holder separately for those items above their service level. b. Residents purchase "tags" from the City (possibly at the cashier's window where bills are paid) and the refuse contractor will automatically take the refuse that is tagged property, without extra charges. For extra refuse that is not "tagged" the refuse contractor will leave a CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: AGENDA SECTION: Work session discussion ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: Refuse service contract amendments BY: K. Hansen BY: DATE: DATE: sticker on the items with instructions for purchasing the tag. 4. Illegally dumped and minor nuisance abatements of refuse items. Currently, Public Works utilizes the public refuse fund to collect and dispose of illegally dumped and minor nuisance items (such as electronics) on private property, after receiving a Police /CSO /FD report. Staff believes private property owners should be responsible for the cost of illegal activity that occurs on their property, including the cost to dispose of these items. This could be narrowed down to rental property as usually tenants, who have abandoned the items or are delinquent on their utility bills, leave the items. Staff proposes amending the Public Health & Safety code to modify the abatement process for minor refuse items, much the same as is done for Tall Grass & Weeds. An accelerated abatement process for code enforcement authorities could be implemented for minor nuisances and the refuse contractor notified to collect and bill the City for the items. Although the refuse contractor does not conduct "abatements" of nuisance properties, they will collect the items and empty the garbage if properly prepared and left at the normal collection point. Refuse/Recycling Quantities (UPDATE): Below is a summary comparison of refuse /recycling amounts for 2009 through August 2010. Year SW Tons Curb Recycling Rec Center Yard Waste !Appli !Appliances Electronics Tirt.sl 2010 405722 1026 23 27 65 1-=5 16 369 39 378 2009 4720 89 725 48 40 45 395 85 512 142 188 Our total recycling through August was 1,053.88 tons, which is on track to meet the year -end county goal of 1,587 tons. Last year during the same time the City was at 765.93 tons. This represents a 37% increase in recycling over last year. The City has received over $11,800 in recycling rebates for commodities and the mid -year SCORE grant from Anoka County in the amount of $36,654 has been received. Most importantly, solid waste disposal is down 663 tons compared to last year, saving over $34,000 in tipping fees, although we are still only recycling about 22% of the City's total refuse. The full -city refuse audit (conducted by City staff and Veolia) is complete with over 80 properties notified of a discrepancy at their residence. To complete the audit, these refuse account owners have been asked to declare which level of service they prefer. Most of these discrepancies were probably long standing as Veolia had initially, during the transition in December, replaced containers with the same size that Allied Waste had at the properties. This was the first full -city audit of refuse in staffs memory. Annual audits will be conducted in the future for all changes that occurred the previous year. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Discussion of the proposed changes to the refuse contract, City refuse service processes, and direction regarding a draft resolution concerning appropriate charges for the City's refuse and recycling system. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 10/18/10 AGENDA SECTION: Work session discussion ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: Sanitary Sewer Collection District 2: I/I report BY: K. Hansen BY: /' and analysis (Televising Update) DATE: DATE: Background: The City of Columbia Heights is currently paying a surcharge on our sanitary sewer bill to Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) in the amount of $81,900, annually. This surcharge is for non - sewage flow from inflow or infiltration (I /I) sources in sewer collection district 2. This surcharge may be reduced to zero, or offset, by eligible expenditures the City makes in I/I reduction measures annually. An example of this is the sump pump disconnect program. In 2005 the Metropolitan Council adopted the following policy: The Council will not provide additional capacity within its interceptor system to serve excessive inflow and infiltration. The Council will establish inflow and infiltration goals for all communities discharging wastewater to the Metropolitan disposal System based on the designed peak -hour capacity of the interceptor(s) serving the community. Communities that have excessive inflow and infiltration in their sanitary sewer systems will be required to eliminate the excessive inflow and infiltration within a reasonable time period. The reasonable time period the MCES established and related surcharge is in place is for a 5 -year period from 2007 -2012. A report detailing the MCES I/I Surcharge Program may be found at: http://metrocouncil.org/envi ronment/Proj ectTeams/ documents /I- I- SurchargeProgram2005.pdf Analysis /Conclusions: Peak exceedance is still occurring at the MCES meter located at 37 Avenue and 5 Street from collection district 2. When the sump pump disconnect program was initiated in 2007, it was known that it may only be a first step in reducing clear water sources and that additional reduction measures may be required depending on source types of inflow or infiltration (such as foundation drains). To further evaluate and better define potential inflow sources, flow testing was conducted in District 2 in smaller tributary areas or sub - collection districts. The monitoring found that in 2 of the 4 sub - districts (5 Street metershed and Jefferson Street metershed) showed a directly related increase in flow to rainfall events. The meter data provided that the buildup in flow was gradual, which would indicate foundation drain connections. The report recommended that these lines be televised with a day or two after a rainfall event to corroborate increased (from dry weather) flows from services. Staff has completed the televising the sewer lines immediately following rainfall events in collection district 2. Several services have been shown with a continuous stream of clear water, further providing evidence of foundation drain connections. Staff recommends the following: A foundation drain disconnect program can be very expensive to a property owner depending how and where the drain is connected to the sewer service (range of $1,500 to $3,000, with some as high as $4,000). St. Anthony has a foundation drain disconnect program through a point of sale inspection. They have reported an average cost of $1,200 (2005 data). Staff recommends televising all of the sanitary service lines in the two sub - districts based upon the findings of the completed mainline televising. Costs per service are estimated at $150 to 200 each — with approximately It should be noted that these are eligible expenses that will offset the City's annual surcharge. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Discussion and direction on: 1. Authorize a Sanitary Sewer Service televising program in Collection District 2. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DATE: OCTOBER 14, 2010 TO: WALT FEHST CITY MANAGER FROM: WILLIAM ELRITE FINANCE DIRECTOR RE: RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS FROM THE OCTOBER 12 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION The first question was for the total dollar amount of category number four items. In response to that question we have attached a chart showing the breakout of category one, two, three, four by each department totaled by row for the departments and totaled by column for the four categories. This chart completes the summarization of information that was provided at the work session and makes it easy to see the total of each category. In category four the two large items are contingencies and transfers. These items account for more then 50% of category four. The next question was related to increase or decreases to fund balance for 2009 and 2010. Joe has prepared a fund balance analysis for each year. The first one attached is for the year ended 2009. As you can see the beginning fund balance in 2009 was significantly below our 45% cash flow reserve requirement. During 2009 due to the significant cutbacks that were made in the budget, including unpaid furlough time, we saw a significant increase to fund balance. This brought us in excess of our 45% cash flow reserve by $170.783. This amount was proposed to be used as part of the City Council's original reduction to the 2011 levy. The next attached document is a projected analysis of the 2010 fund balance. The first item to note here is that it is cumulative and brings forward the fund balance from 2009. The good news here is that it looks like we will be coming out much better than anticipated in the 2010 budget. As you may recall the 2010 budget for the General Fund used $448,179 in fund balance to balance the 2010 budget. As you can see from the projected revenue and expenses on the 2010 projection we are anticipating a decrease to fund balance of $184,000. This is an improvement of $264,179 from the adopted 2010 budget. However, keep in mind that at this point in time attempting to project the December 31 fund balance really is no more reliable than trying to project the weather conditions for December 31 If you need any additional information at this time let either myself or Joe know; otherwise, I am anticipating that both Joe and I will be available for the work session on Monday, October 18`" WE:slh 1010141CM Attachments: Worksheet showing General Fund Library Fund totals by category Worksheet on the analysis of the 2009 changes in fund balance Worksheet on the 2010 projected fund balance cc: Joe Kloiber, Assistant Finance Director City of Columbia Heights Category Summary by Department Department Dept Code Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Totals City Council 101.41110 90,461 21,908 27,082 4,816 144,267 City Manager 101.41320 385,115 13,686 9,430 4,012 412,243 City Clerk 101.41410 60,862 5,403 3,687 3,015 72,967 Assessing 101.41550 4,881 119,940 0 3,200 128,021 Legar Services 101.41610 0 185,366 1,350 0 186,716 Finance 101.41510 651,400 25,300 31,500 13,500 721,700 General Government Buildings 101.41940 7,596 43,646 16,484 93,078 160,804 Recognition Special Events 101.45050 0 805 33,873 3,000 37,678 Contingencies 101.49200 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 Transfers 101.49300 0 0 0 195,000 195,000 Police 101.42100 3,262,516 302,219 27,710 24,520 3,616,965 Animal Control 101.42700 0 16,263 0 0 16,263 Fire 101.42200 927,564 168,444 35,377 13,300 1,144,685 Property Inspections 101.42300 176,898 6,568 1,400 0 184,866 Engineering 101.43100 279,954 45,568 8,827 6,021 340,370 Streets 101.43121 433,649 278,491 82,929 6,696 801,765 Street Lighting 101.43160 5,907 149,891 3,536 10 159,344 Traffic Signs and Signals 101.43170 52,395 18,737 6,742 689 78,563 Parks 101.45200 462,941 191,933 108,992 10,392 774,258 Tree Maintenance 101.46102 71,560 39,857 13,394 4,283 129,094 Rec. Administration and General 101.45000 156,503 21,293 900 1,659 180,355 Youth Athletics 101.45001 22,429 11,226 500 800 34,955 Adult Athletics 101.45003 12,580 12,731 400 50 25,761 Youth Enrichment 101.45004 34,842 22,093 1,400 600 58,935 Travel Athletics 10 1.45005 17,812 13,187 1,725 250 32,974 Trips and Outings 101.45030 18,692 37,017 250 0 55,959 Senior Citizens 101.45040 62,073 21,805 1,300 250 85,428 Murzyn Hall 101.45129 155,617 36,569 50,352 1,600 244,138 Gym Fund 101.45130 40,040 86,210 0 0 126,250 Library 240.45500 549,691 207,119 20,310 13,350 790,470 Totals 7,943,978 2,103,275 489,450 454,091 10,990,794 Note: Over 50% of category 4 is Contingencies and Transfers. r- .1. CI LO 0) 1.0 CD co a) I- e- 01 1".... 0) Lif c, Lo vt 0)C l' ot.... o 1••■• CD CV Vi e- '4 "i .....; cc ....-.. ........ `C) N (I) r- LO r-- .cr LO C'Ll CO LO CO CO JO LC) 0) •c— C) a) 0) L.- 'Q '0" C`i 00 •■•••- N-• a) a) 0 69- 0 -0 ‘.... o (i) 2 t() , 4- c (I) o cu a) - Fe E Iii a 0) Cr 4) 77 0) ..0 2 0 0 0 • CT) /..... 0 (0 C\I - 0; - ) .0) -C 0) c o -c.. L() _co 0 ii) ° .0 as c c o (fl 0)_ a 4,... u) •- • '-' :-...-: ->.7 m I-- M 73 0 0 (1) C § 0 0 0 0 CO 0 .— cn cb DC (i) 22 co ,-, ..c -0 0 O. ``.• ...Y C i— c a a) c To ..... O a- • a) :._-_ 0(/) x .‹ >-• ..c ct. 0 a 0 cx, ..t 0 a , 2. a) .2 a) 0) o E2 u .- F. co t m -5- 0 •L'' 0 0 .....:‘ Q) 0 -0 0 • — 0 0 .Q la 0) - 0 cc o b 8 Zi Iii a , "... c c:, 1/3 E 0 c CNI 0 a) 0 "V a) a) 0) E 0 C) . El2 - E' al F c -.. L... `... a) a) o • '4:c; co c) E u) o a) a) la a) 0 CZ c.) c c e - 0 - 15) CD 0 0 0 RS "Cs C ,„••••• 0 4.) ,-- c 9., O = 0 z 03 — L- ••■■• 0 ''''' au CO CO 2 CD Ca 92 o c as .0 E (13 a) .12 co V (I) E • ai 73 0 0 .- o) c C - a ct :2 c (1) (1) • ,.., a 4-- a) :a LL Tv' u) --_ a) c c co 4 _m c c • > cc .... 4... CO a) CI_ 0, CT) r:3) •-, as o NI- o o a) 0 ,_ c .a .. (I) CO " ....t CD 0 4... 0. c 0 a CO 03 c 0 ‘..- 0 0) C 0 - 0 ('3 cc 'a .... .c -c XI — 73 4••• 0 .... C • ...' CD a) >, ---. ()) 0 0 .0 (,, •-• .12 i 0 To ...) .0 al o .— a 6 . ...", 4 „ c - a a) 0 0 -, . . • 113 0 a C 0 • - z Sc-s 3 0 a) t to '0 ...:-.. 0 a '..,..,-- 0 CS) c .... .... 0 0 0U 0 .0 a !a al >, a) TI o : u) a) c 6 . c (a. ."E ( 7- 3 2 c ,..,(13 :.--, E e.> cu c . 4 ) a 0 0 .. .0 u) - 0 cNI co E ili 2 a) CO LL > •41,-.. a) a) a .c.: 0 ce CD 0 m i3 cp a m ()(D<}--Q z \ 0 \/ a a « _ e o co r © G 2 « _ 01 4 ¥ \ 4.9- 40 \ N-R / SS % /\ cu o� ) a a c 0 � / 0 / 2 7 a) g c S \ ca § \ / ƒ 2 S \ / c \ / a \ / / k 0) / o 3 * & § a 2 2 u c O/ \ - ƒ \ & % \§ \ 0) ( \ — as 2A as 2a O. '0 a) z _ / g% m k o )/ o "ra } c /k r) 12 ° ° @ \ u) fa C a 7 /{ $ 2 �; u ;2 t. \ ....(7 oz _ \ �\ 7\ _ = k/ CA _ * = a2 c � 0 k 2 \\ \ > 0 w �c E /% 2 c0 > 7 0 u_ƒ) 2 \\ \ ] } 2± a ° " \ . // .....° ° 0 � a ƒ §� /r )� k \ oo� CO == a e 6 < a 2