Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2015-12-08 Tuesday, December 8, 2015 TOWN BOARD 4:45 p.m. – 6:40 p.m. STUDY SESSION Rooms 202/203 4:45 p.m. Briefing on Financing of Improvements to Small Water Systems. (Dir. Bergsten, Attorney White & Ed Schemm/Larimer Co. Health Dept.) 5:30 p.m. Dinner Served 5:45 p.m. Agenda Policy (Administrator Lancaster) 6:15 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions. 6:25 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items. (Board Discussion) 6:40 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting. “Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this meeting at approximately 4:30 p.m.” AGENDA UTILITIES Report To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: Reuben Bergsten, Utilities Director Greg White, Town Attorney Ed Schemm, Assistant Director of Environmental Health Larimer County Jeff Boles, Water Superintendent Date: December 8, 2015 RE: Briefing on Financing of Improvements to Small Water Systems Objective: Inform the Town Board of how the Town is stepping up to help improve the quality and reliability of the Estes Valley’s infrastructure. The Town Board may face decisions that facilitate improvements to small drinking water systems in the Estes Valley. Present Situation: Changes in the State Drinking Water Revolving Fund loan program have motivated us to research other financing options. The old process allowed project financing to be secured to pay for both detailed design and construction. The new State process requires the detail design to be completed prior to project financing. Funding a detail design up front is beyond small water systems’ budgets. We have engaged the USDA Rural Development (RD) office as an alternate financing method. The USDA does provide upfront funding for detailed design. The USDA RD program has opened the door to other options: a. Continue with an Improvement District process using the State program if the private nonprofit water system can provide upfront funding of the detailed design. b. The private nonprofit water system can seek out financing for system improvements and continue to own and operate their system. c. At the request of the private water system, Town Board enters into a Voluntary Water System Transfer and the Town becomes the applicant for USDA RD project financing. Proposal: At present there are four water systems considering system improvements: 1. Park Entrance Mutual Pipeline & Water Company (PEMPWCo) 2. Hondius Water System 3. Charles Heights 4. Prospect Mountain Water Company We are currently pursuing option “c.” for PEMPWCo. As details unfold, the Town Board will be asked to consider the approval of the Voluntary Water System Transfer Agreement and to vote on the formation of a new Park Entrance Capital Improvement Enterprise Fund. Advantages: Option “a.” has been successful in the past. We would continue to work with the County as we have in the past. Option “b.” is highly desirable from our perspective; however, as regulatory pressure grows small water systems will struggle to stay in compliance. As evidence to this, Windcliff has approached the Town to operate their system, i.e. operations, maintenance, regulatory testing and reporting. Consolidation of smaller systems will improve the Estes Valley’s drinking water infrastructure through economy of scale which will lead to drinking water reliability and quality. Option “c” does the following: 1)Eliminates the Improvement District vote which speeds up the project. 2)Eliminates the Improvement District property lien. The lien is often the barrier for gaining consensus to proceed with improvement projects. 3)Liens can also reduce property sales (transactions). Mortgage companies will require first position on the property deed so owners are faced with reducing their equity to pay off the lien. 4)USDA RD program requirements do not require the Davis Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA). This reduces construction administration costs, reduces construction costs and will increase the likelihood of local contractors bidding on these projects. 5) Financing, example using $1,000,000: State Revolving Fund 20 years at 2%, bi-annual payments $60,911.20/year USDA Rural Development 40 years at 3.5%, bi-annual payments $46,641.86/year •The 40-year loan improves the water customers’ cash flow by reducing the payment. •The 40-year term is reasonable as ductile iron pipe has seen over 100 years of useful service life, and counting. Disadvantages: 1)Improvement Districts require a formal vote which eliminates perceptions the Town is imposing something on property owners. - 2 - a) Countered by a requirement to have a signed petition with a minimum percentage of signatures (percentage to be determined by the Town Board). 2) The Town Board will have to set a new rate for new enterprise funds. Utility billing will have to bill and collect the new rate. a) The alternative is to have the County bill and collect the funds through an Improvement District. The Town’s Utility is in the business of billing for services. Adding another line item to the utility bill is simple compared to what the County has to do. 3) The Town will have to form a new Enterprise Fund. a) This is a relatively simple process. There is some additional accounting and auditing burden; however, it is limited to holding the loan and paying the loan. All operations, maintenance and regulatory testing/reporting will be conducted through the existing Water Enterprise Fund. 4) Vacant lots and properties on wells will not be obligated to pay for the infrastructure improvement. They will benefit from fire protection. a) HOAs with authority to levy assessments could choose to assess vacant lots and properties on wells and pay off the loan early. The USDA RD program does not have any early payoff penalties. Action Recommended: No action required at this time. Budget: Accounting project codes have been established for each of the pending systems. Time worked on these associated projects will be billed to the project and reimbursed through the project financing. Costs associated with developing the general process have been absorbed by the County and Town. Level of Public Interest Public interest is very high but isolated to those property owners currently being served by private systems, bankrupt systems or in neighborhoods where a strong contingent of properties wish to expedite improvements, many of which are outside the Town boundary but within our water service area. - 3 - TOWN ADMINISTRATOR Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees From: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator Date: December 8th, 2015 RE: Draft Board Policy on Board Meeting Agendas Objective: To provide guidelines and direction to staff in preparing agendas for Town Board Study Sessions, Regular Board Meetings and Standing Committee Meetings. Present Situation: . Currently there is Board policy on how items get on the agenda for Study Sessions, but the procedures for regular Town Board meetings and Standing Committee meetings is less clear. This has placed staff in the awkward position of either adding agenda items as the request of one Trustee or not adding an item requested by a Trustee. Staff would like more direction on how to handle these requests. Proposal: A draft policy has been prepared for Board review and comment Advantages:  Clarifies how items are placed on Board agendas  Removes ambiguity for staff preparing the agenda  Will help prevent situations where items appear on an agenda that the majoring of the Board does not want to consider or discuss. Disadvantages:  Places restrictions on items to be discussed by the Board  Could limit discussion of an item that a minority of the Board wants to have on an agenda.  Requires additional lead time before most items can be added to an agenda Action Recommended: For discussion only Level of Public Interest low Note – Any item requiring a change to the Municipal Code, Development Code or any other action requiring an Ordinance to be passed by the Town Board is required to have the Ordinance included.   Draft 2 11‐30‐15  AGENDAS General - The Town Clerk is responsible for the preparation and publication of the agendas for any meeting of the Board of Trustees. The Town Clerk shall establish deadlines for items to be added to the agenda in order to provide adequate public notice of Board meetings and to fully meet the requirements of the Colorado Open Meetings Act. 1. Regular Board Meetings a. Agendas for regular board meetings shall follow the format approved by the Board in Policy 103 - Town Board Procedures. b. Adding items to the Agenda i. Routine Administrative Issues - Routine administrative issues, including renewal of ongoing contracts, approval of bills, approval of minutes, issuance, renewal and transfer of liquor licenses, land use issues requiring quasi-judicial action and proclamations or other ceremonial actions may be placed on the agenda by the Town Clerk without any further approval. ii. Items requested by Town Staff - Any items, other than routine administrative items, must be approved by the Town Administrator before being placed on the agenda. The Town Administrator may place these items on the Regular Board agenda without any further approval of the Board. iii. Reports or requests from outside entities - The Town Administrator has the authority to approve any requests from outside or partner agencies wishing to present before the Town Board. This includes update reports (I.E. Updates from the Superintendent of Rocky Mountain National Park) and requests requiring action (i.e. requests for letters of support, requests for board participation on community projects.) iv. Legal Issues - Legal issues requiring Board discussion or action may be placed on the agenda by either the Town Administrator or the Town Attorney. v. Trustee requested items - Any trustee may request that an item be added to the regular board agenda by one of the following methods. 1. Request that the item be added to the agenda of an upcoming Regular meeting during the Trustee comment   Draft 2 11‐30‐15  period at a study session. If any other Trustee objects to the item being placed on the agenda, the request must be made a Regular Board meeting. 2. Request that an item be added to an upcoming agenda during Trustee comment period at a regular board meeting. The Board may approve the addition of the item to a future board meeting by consensus or may call for a vote. If a vote is called for, a majority affirmative vote of the Board is required to add the item to a future agenda. 3. By an affirmative vote of a majority of the Trustees present at a meeting, additional matters may be added to the agenda of any such meeting, as long as it is allowed by statute. vi. By referral from a Board Standing Committee. vii. Emergency items - At times it may be necessary to add items to an agenda on short notice to protect the immediate health, safety and well being of the community or the organization. The Mayor, Town Administrator or Town Attorney may add emergency items to any agenda at anytime, at their sole discretion. 2. Study Sessions a. The Town Board will review the schedule for upcoming Study Sessions. The Mayor, Trustees or staff may request or recommend any appropriate matters for Town Board consideration; however the Town Administrator will only place items on a Study Session agenda with the direction of a majority of the Board. b. By an affirmative vote of a majority of the Trustees present at a meeting, additional matters may be added to the agenda of any such meeting, as long as it is allowed by statute. 3. Board Standing Committees (PUP, CD/CS, Audit) a. The Town Clerk shall prepare the agendas for the Board Standing Committees in consultation with the committee chair and appropriate staff. b. Items on the agenda should be limited to the scope of the specific committee. c. Any items requiring Board approval or further action must be referred by the Committee to the full board including a recommendation as to whether the item should be considered on the Consent Agenda or as an Action Item.   Draft 2 11‐30‐15  d. By an affirmative vote of a majority of the Trustees present at a meeting, additional matters may be added to the agenda of any such meeting, as long as it is allowed by statute. e. All Actions of Standing Committees are to be considered recommendations and not final actions representing the Board of Trustees, unless otherwise authorized by Board policy.                    January 12, 2016  Discussion of Vacation Rental Fees and Code Enforcement January 26, 2016  Fund Balance Policy  Revised Purchasing Policy  Updated Long Range Pavement Improvement Program February 9, 2016  Discussion of Noise Ordinance  Update on 2015 I-code Adoption and Local Amendments, Including Property Maintenance Code February 23, 2016  Policy on Naming Town Facilities  Update on Consideration of Transit Going Year Round in Order to Qualify for Federal Funding Items Approved – Unscheduled: (Items are not in order of priority)  Update on Upcoming Construction Schedules for Major Projects Through 2018 – Include in Budget Discussions  Discussion of Impact Fees and Other Funding Options to Support Housing Goals  Fish Hatchery Property Discussion  Town’s Role in Economic Development as Related to Other Organizations (Possibly a Work Session with the EDC & VEP)  Briefing on Storm Drainage and Flood Management Issues and Management Options. Discussion of Storm Water Utility.  Update on Environmental Assessment NEPA Process Draft Concerning the Loop  How the Board Handles Off Cycle Requests for Funding From Outside Organizations  Follow Up on Broadband Issues Study Session Items for Board Consideration:  None Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items December 8, 2015