02-06-08 JWC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
JOINT WATER COMMISSION
1 :30 pm - February 6, 2008
Council Conference Room,
Golden Valley City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of minutes of the January 2, 2008 regular JWC
meeting.
3. Resolution 08-02 - Making Annual Elections for the 2007-2008
Insurance Policy.
4. MMKR Audit Contract
5. T-Mobile constructing a facility on the south tower site.
6. Next meeting.
7. Adjournment.
Joint Water Commission Meeting
January 2, 2008
Page 1 of 2
JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES
Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope
Meeting of January 2, 2008
The Golden Valley - Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission meeting was. called to
order at 1 :30 pm, in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room.
Commissioners Present:
Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley
Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope
Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal
Staff Present:
Bert Tracy, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Golden Valley
Guy Johnson, Public Works Director, New Hope
Tom Mathisen, Public Works Director, Crystal
Randy Kloepper, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Cry
Dave Lemke, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, Golde
Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley
Paul Coone, Operations Manager, New Hope
Approval of JWC Minutes
MOVED by Norris, seconded by McDona
meeting. The motion carried unani
minutes of the December 5
ived for the 18 inch valve replacement.
Quotes:
$49,430.00
$82,750.00
by Burt, motion carried unanimously to award the bid for the
o the lowest responsible bidder, Lametti & Sons, Inc., in the
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES FOR JOINT WATER FUNDS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Joint Water Commission of the Cities of Golden Valley, Crystal,
and New Hope that the following are named as depositories for funds on deposit as
provided in the Laws of the State of Minnesota:
Wells Fargo Golden Valley
Joint Water Commission Meeting
January 2, 2008
Page 2 0'2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following signatories or alternates are authorized to
sign on checks drawn on funds deposited:
General Checking:
Joint Water Chair:
Alternate:
Joint Water Vice Chair
The motion for the adoption was seconded by Chair Burt; and upon
thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: McDonald and Norris
against the same: NONE; whereupon said resolution was declar
adopted, signed by the Chair and his signature attested by th
Next Meeting
The next meeting will be held when Scott Harder is re
plan for review.
Other
Tom reported that Scott Harder is meeting d Sandy Colvin-Roy prior
to the final task force meeting; he is mee~i~g wit nia to discuss financial
review findings and expectations for a kick",Off meeting; and he is arranging a meeting with
the three city finance managers to giscus~ water conservation and related financial impacts
which will be the final step befor bmitt' the water supply plan update to the JWC for
review.
C
Adiournment
Burt moved to adjourn the
ATTEST:
Thomas D. Burt, Chair
ministrative Assistant
Resolution 08-01
February 6, 2008
Commissioner ~ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION MAKING ANNUAL ELECTIONS FOR THE 2007-08 INSURANCE
POLICY
WHEREAS, the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission must
declare whether or not to waive the statutory limits on tort liability established by
Minnesota Statues 456.04, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commissioners of the Golden
Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission does not waive the statutory limits
on tort liability established by Minnesota Statues 466.04 for the 2008 insurance policy.
Thomas D. Burt, Joint Water Chair
ATTEST:
Sue Virnig, Treasurer
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner
and a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon
said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Chair and her
signature attested by the Vice-Chair.
Resolution 08-01
February 6, 2008
Commissioner'!! introduced theJollowing resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION MAKING ANNUAL ELECTIONS FOR THE 2007-08 INSURANCE
POLICY
WHEREAS, the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission must
declare whether or not to waive the statutory limits on tort liability established by
Minnesota Statues 456.04, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commissioners of the Golden
Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission does not waive the statutory limits
on tort liability established by Minnesota Statues 466.04 for the 2008 insurance policy.
Thomas D. Burt, Joint Water Chair
ATTEST:
Sue Virnig, Treasurer
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner
* and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Burt,
McDonald, and Norris; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon
said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Chair and her
signature attested by the Vice-Chair.
January 25, 2008
PRINCIPALS
Kenneth W Malloy, CPA
Thomas M. Montague, CPA
Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA
Paul A. Radosevich, CPA
William J. Lauer, CPA
James H. Eichten, CPA
Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA
Victoria 1. Holinka, CPA
M
CERTIFIED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTANTS
To the Board of Commissioners
Golden Valley - Crystal- New Hope
Joint Water Commission
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Weare pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide for the Golden Valley -
Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission (the Commission) for the year ended December 31,2007.
We will audit the financial statements of governmental activities, each major fund, the aggregate
remaining fund information, and the budgetary comparison for the General Fund, which collectively
comprise the Commission's basic financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Accounting standards generally accepted in the United States provide for certain required supplementary
information (RSI), such as management's discussion and analysis (MD&A), to accompany the
Commission's basic financial statements. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited
procedures to the Commission's RSI, if applicable. These limited procedures will consist principally of
inquires of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation, which management is
responsible for affirming to us in its representation letter. Unless we encounter problems with the
presentation of the RSI or with procedures relating to it, we will disclaim an opinion on it.
Supplementary information other than RSI, such as combining and individual fund financial statements,
may also accompany the Commission's basic financial statements. We will subject the supplementary
information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial statements and will
provide an opinion on it in relation to the basic financial statements.
We will perform the required State Legal Compliance Audit conducted in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the provisions of the Legal Compliance
Audit Guide promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute ~ 6.65, and it will include
such tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to conclude
that, for the items tested, the Commission has complied with the material terms and conditions of
applicable legal provisions.
Audit Objectives
The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your basic financial statements are
fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America and to report on the fairness of the additional information referred to in the
first paragraph when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Our audit
will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America and will include tests of accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to
enable us to express such opinions. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unqualified,
we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the
audit or are unable to form, or have not formed opinions, we may decline to express opinions or to issue a
report as a result
of this engagement.
Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A.
5353 Wayzata Boulevard. Suite 410 . Minneapolis, MN 55416 . Telephone: 952-545-0424 . Teiefax: 952-545-0569 . www.mmkr.com
Golden Valley - Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission
January 25, 2008
Page 2
Management Responsibilities
Management is responsible for establishing and maintammg effective internal controls, including
monitoring ongoing activities; for the selection and application of accounting principles; and for the fair
presentation in the financial statements of the respective financial position of the governmental activities,
each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission and the respective
changes in financial position and where applicable, cash flows, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Management is responsible for the basic financial
statements and all accompanying information as well as all representations contained therein. You are
also responsible for management decisions and functions; for designating an individual with suitable skill,
knowledge, or experience to oversee our financial statement preparation services and accepting
responsibility for them.
Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us and
for the accuracy and completeness of that information. Management is responsible for adjusting the
financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the representation letter
that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and
pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the
financial statements taken as a whole.
You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect
fraud, and for informing us about known or suspected fraud or illegal acts affecting the Commission
involving (1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others
where the fraud or illegal acts could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your
responsibilities include informing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud or
illegal acts affecting the Commission received in communications from employees, former employees,
regulators, or others. In addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the Commission
complies with applicable laws and regulations.
Audit Procedures - General
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be
examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, rather than
absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from
(1) errors, (2) fraudulent [mancial reporting, (3) misappropriation of assets, or (4) violations of laws or
governmental regulations that are attributable to the Commission or to acts by management or employees
acting on behalf of the Commission.
Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance and because we will not
perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements or
noncompliance may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect
immaterial misstatements or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and
material effect on the financial statements or major programs. However, we will inform you of any
material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that come to our
attention. We will also inform you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our
attention, unless clearly inconsequential. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by
our audit and does not extend to any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors.
Golden Valley - Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission
January 25, 2008
Page 3
Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the
accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of
receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors,
and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the
engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will
also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters.
Audit Procedures - Internal Control
Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the Commission and its environment, including
internal control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and to
design the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures. An audit is not designed to provide
assurance on internal control or to identify deficiencies in internal control. However, during the audit, we
will communicate to management and those charged with governance internal control related matters that
are required to be communicated under professional standards.
Audit Procedures - Compliance
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we will perform tests of the Commission's compliance with applicable laws and
regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not
be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion.
Audit Administration, Fees, and Other
We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will
locate any documents selected by us for testing.
The assistance to be supplied by your personnel, including the preparation of schedules and analysis of
accounts, typing all cash or other confirmations we request, and locating any invoices selected by us for
testing, will be discussed and coordinated with you.
The audit documentation for this engagement are the property of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski,
Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR) and constitutes confidential information. However, we may be
requested to make certain audit documentation available to a regulatory agency pursuant to authority
given to it by law or regulation. If requested, access to such audit documentation will be provided under
the supervision of MMKR personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we may provide photocopies of
selected audit documentation to the regulatory agency. The regulatory agency may intend, or decide, to
distribute the photocopies or information contained therein to others, including other governmental
agenCIes.
The audit documentation for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of five years after the report
release or for any additional period requested by the regulatory agency. If we are aware that a federal
awarding agency, pass-through entity, or auditee is contesting an audit finding, we will contact the
party(ies) contesting the audit finding for guidance prior to destroying the audit documentation.
Golden Valley - Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission
January 25,2008
Page 4
Our fees for these services will be based on the actual time spent at our standard hourly rates. We will
also bill you for travel and other out-of-pocket costs such as report production, typing, and postage. Our
standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience level of
the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work
progresses and are payable upon presentation. Unless additional work is requested, or circumstances
require additional work, we estimate that the basic audit fees [excluding fees related the change in
auditing standards described in Statement on Auditing Standards Nos. 104 to 111 (SAS Suite)] to be
$7,500.
If we find that additional audit procedures are required, or if additional services are requested by the
Commission, those services will be billed at our standard hourly rates. Additional audit procedures may
be required for certain accounting issues or events such as new accounting or auditing standards, due to
turnover of key accounting personnel, or if there is an indication of misappropriation or misuse of public
funds.
In recent years, a number of highly publicized events occurred that weakened the general public's
confidence in financial reporting and the audit process. In an effort to help restore credibility, the
auditing profession has issued guidance which reengineers the audit process, requiring a "risk-based"
audit approach and prescribing more extensive audit procedures. These changes have specifically been
directed at increasing the likelihood of auditors detecting and reporting material inaccuracies within
financial statements and increasing the overall analysis and testing of the internal controls of each
organization. The newest set of standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants are the Statement on Auditing Standards Nos. 104 to 111, "Auditor's Assessment of Risk in
a Financial Statement Audit" (SAS Suite). We have explained these new required standards in more
detail to all of our governmental audit clients in recent management reports or within other
communications. The concept behind the required changes is good, and it should provide additional
benefits to your organization, but unfortunately it will come at an additional cost. We understand the
funding constraints of our governmental clients, and the scrutiny that may be directed towards you to
control costs and keep within established budget parameters. Others in our profession have estimated the
additional audit costs to implement the new requirements could be as high as 30 percent of the existing
audit cost. Because of our efficiencies in auditing governmental entities, and the thoroughness of our
existing audit process, we are confident that we will be able to keep the increase to implement these
additional procedures to a range of 10 percent to 15 percent of our normal fees. We believe this is also
consistent with industry standards, including guidance published by the Government Finance Officers
Association. We will bill you for these additional costs as a separate line item in the first year of the
requirement. If the audit process results conclude that the assessed risks exceed this projected level, the
nature and scope of the engagement may change and we may require a modification of our fee estimate.
This modification will be fully discussed with management of the Commission during the normal course
of our audit procedures. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding these new standards.
With regard to the electronic dissemination of audited financial statements, including financial statements
published electronically on your Internet website, you understand that electronic sites are a means to
distribute information and, therefore, we are not required to read the information contained in these sites
or to consider the consistency of other information in the electronic site with the original document.
If you intend to publish or otherwise reproduce the financial statements, and make reference to our firm
name, you agree to provide us with printers' proofs or masters for our review and approval before
printing. You also agree to provide us with a copy of the final reproduced material for our approval
before it is distributed.
Golden Valley- Crystal- New Hope Joint Water Commission
January 25, 2008
Page 5
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the Commission and believe this letter accurately
summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If
you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and
return it to us.
Sincerely,
MALLOY, MONTAGUE, KARNOWSKI, RADOSEVICH & CO., P.A.
J:f2tc- ~ cf~
William Lauer, CPA
Principal
WJL:lmb
Response:
This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Joint Water
Commission.
By:
Title:
Date:
WIPFLi".
November 3, 2004
To the Principals
Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Malloy,
Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. (the "Firm") in effect for the year ended May 31, 2004. A
system of quality control encompasses the Firm's organizational structure and the policies adopted and
procedures established to provide it with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional
standards. The elements of quality control are described in the Statements on Quality Control Standards
issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). The design of the system and
compliance with it are the responsibility of the firm. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
design of the system, and the Firm's compliance with the system based on our review.
Our review wa.s conducted in accordance with standards established by the Peer Review Board of the
AICPA. In performing our review, we obtained an understanding of the system of quality control for the
Firm's accounting and auditing practice. In addition, we tested compliance with the Firm's quality
control policies and procedures to the extent we considered appropriate. These tests covered the
application of the Firm's policies and procedures on selected engagements. Because our review was
based on selective tests, it would not necessarily disclose all weaknesses in the system of quality control
or all instances of lack of compliance with it
Because there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system of quality control, departures
from the system may occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of a system of
quality control to future periods is subject to the risk that the system of quality control may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or because the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Malloy,
Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. in effect for the year ended May 31, 2004, has been
designed to meet the requirements of the quality control standards for an accounting and auditing
practice established by the AICPA and was complied with during the year then ended to provide the
Firm with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards.
w~. LLfJ
Wipfli LLP
Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Wipfli LLP
3703 Oakwood Hills Parkway
Eau Claire, WI 54701
PO Box 690
Eau Claire, WI 54702-0690
715.832.3407
fax 715.832.0475
www.wipfli.com
November 3, 2004
To the Principals
Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., PA
We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Malloy,
Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., PA (the "Firm") in effect for the year ended May 31, 2004,
and have issued our report thereon dated November 3, 2004. That report should be read in conjunction
with the comments in this letter, which were considered in determining our opinion.
Matters That Did Not Result in a Modified Report
Engagement Performance
Findinq~ The Firm's quality control policies and procedures require that all engagements be properly
documented in accordance with the requirements of professional standards, regulatory authorities, and
the Firm. However our review disclosed instances (expectations of results of analytical testing,
compliance testing procedures in an ERISA plan audit) where the testing documentation was lacking.
Through discussions with engagement personnel, we were able to satisfy ourselves that appropriate
testing had been completed.
Recommendations-The Firm should discuss at a staff training session its policies regarding engagement
testing documentation. All Principals should be advised to monitor compliance with these policies when
reviewing audit working papers.
w~. LLfJ
Wipfli LLP
Eau Claire, Wisconsin
1:\WORD\Audit & Accounting\70390 Malloy Montague\70390 Letter Of Comments.Doc
Minneapolis Water Works Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC)
January 16,2008 - Meeting Minutes
Columbia Heights Membran~ Filtration Plant, Training Room
Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421-3270
Attendees: Citizen's Advisory Committee
Present
Absent
Gerry Sell (MPHAC)
Tom Mathisen, City of Crystal (JWC)
Kirk Smith (MDH)
Chris Elvrum (MCES)
Ray Hozalski (U of M)
J.L. Strand (CLlC)
Lorraine Teel
Pam Blixt
Others
Shahin Rezpnia (MWW)
Chris Catlin, MWW, Supt. of Operations and Maintenance
Rob Verke, MWW, Director of Engineering
Marie Asgipn (MWW Supt. Of Distribution)
Trisha McDonald, MDH
Greg Stonehol,lse, HDR Engineering
Meeting called to order -., 3:10pm
1. Welcome and In~roductions of all, specifically introducing all of his
Minneapolis Water Works staff. (Shahin Rezania)
2. Current Projects Update - Commentary regarding the number of projects
MWW has programmed; and, the limited budget thatMWW has to implement
that work. Rob introduced himself to the CAC and briefed the group on
ongoing projects. (Rob Verke)
a. Columbia HeiGhts Membrane Filtration Plant - Working on final project
closeout. Dale Folen, Project Manager, is working closely with
contractor to. finalize all punchlist items. Retainage on the project is
still maintained in the form of a bond. Still working with GE to pursue
resolution of issues relative to ongoing issues within the plant. Currerit
issues outstanding include backwash system equipment failures
(warrantee covered item); control and valve timing issues (warrantee
item); and the combination of those that are potentially linked to
membrane breakage (warrantee item). MWW is working on this with
City Attorney to resolve issues. Not leading to capacity problems
during normal operations, but pinning of modules is very labor
inteflsive; and therefore, cost intensive. Old plant is available.for
production as reqI,Jired. Chris Catlifl outlined fiQer breakage impact on
operations and the means and methods for maintaining and repairing
memb(anes fornormal operation.Causeof problem is still not
completely quantifiable; and, MWWis cautious about trying to provide
solutions to a problem that belongs to GE. Failures, under the original
contract, have occurred and the city has run through the inventory of
membrane cartridges maintained by the City. Therate of breakage to
date is beyond what is expected for normal operation. Appearances
indicate that solving pressure spikes and control issues will drive
resolution of this issue.
b. Columbia HeiahtsSecuritvProiect. Gates, security cameras, bollards
and other improvements will be incorporated tomake security at the
Columbia Heights facility a remote operation. Project bids on 23
January for 2008 construction.
c. Fridlev Membrane Filtration Plant - 30% design has been completed
by CH2MHill. Pall is the selected membrane manufacturer for this
project. Membranes were selected using a competitive, pilot test-
based process, similar to that used for the CHMFP. City staff is
reviewing the 30% design and will complete that review by February 1.
During the week of February 11, the City will complete a Value
Engineering workshop for this project. . From this workshop, the project
design will proceed. There was also a. brief discussion of taste and
odor issues during 2007. Current plan is for Fridley membrane plant
operation in early 2011.
d. Pump Station #4 Reconstruction - City's MWW Project Manager
retired and Bonestroo has taken over the design of that project,
providing the opportunity for a value engineering study as well. This
resulted in the elimination of the suction header piping from the design,
saving the City approximately $5 million. Plant internal piping design
was modified and simplified, again resulting in likely drastic cost
savings. Below grade pipe gallery was also removed, saving
additional cost. Project will likely be bid in spring 2008 forfall 2008
construction.
e. Dewaterinq Facilitv at Fridlev - February begins the capital long range
facility planning process. Dewatering plant program will likely be a
2009 effort unless city finances allow slight acceleration of that project
in late 2008. City is currently using centrifuges and plans to replace
those with migrating filter presses as a least cost option for long term
operations.
f. Bio Monitorinq of Source Water - (Chris Catlin) MWW continues to use
clams to monitor raw water quality in terms of the presence of toxins in
the water. This project is an ongoing study being implemented in
conjunction with an EPA grant. St. Cloud and a location in Coon
Rapids are also planning on installing a similar "early warning" system
that would give the city of Minneapolis approximately 1 day of notice of
the presence of a potential toxin in the raw water supply.
g. Air Monitorincr- Chemical Release - (Shahin Rezania) Project
initiated by the Department of Health to ensu~e an adequate means of
notifying surrounding area of a potential chemical release. A table top
exercise is being developed for both air release andfdr a potential
water qUality contamination event. The intent is to develop a
coordinated MWW effort within the City of Minneapolis to ensure that
internal safety and public works staff have developed and understand
the response needs.
h. Water/WastewaterResIJonse Network (WARN) -(Shahin Rezania) In
short, thIs is a "utilities helping utilities" effort. Getting very close to a
draft "joint powers" type of agreement between local municipalities.
Exarnples ofthe potential application of this network might include the
southeast MN flood event in the summer of 2007 or the St. Peter
tornado of several years ago. These have been established in many
states in recent years, especially on the gulf coast and west coast
which are more prone to hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural
disasters.
i. MFnneapo/is/ St. Paul Interconnection - (Shahin Rezania) Governor
subrnitted proposal for capital bonding in 2008 and the interconnection
did not receive any funding under this administration's outline. John
Stine (MDH) indicated that work needs lobe done to advance this
decision; and, that this interconnection is not dead, but just not funded
at this time. There is a bit of a push at the legislature to call this a
"regional" interconnection because this would service 18 additional
metro-communities. Shahin will continue to work with John Stine at the
MDH to advance this project.
J. Watermain Cleaninq and Lininq - '(Marie Asgian) Planning on lining
49,000 feet of cleaning and lining in Minneapolis, 5,000 feet in
Columbia Heights and 5,000 feet in Edina. City typically uses cement
lining primarily due to costs.. Operationally, the pipe must be bone dry
for epoxy lining. Marie Asgian outlined the pro~ess used for'cement
mortar lining of the waterrnains to create a uniform lining thickness in
the system; Lining can be completed pipe from 6 to 36 inches. 2008
focus will be primarily within the street reconstruction capital
improvements because of cost savings in pavement restoration.
Shingle Creek is one exception to that approach in 2008. A ten year
plan has been developed for cleaning and lining to inform the City
Engineer of the magnitude of the program and of the limitations of
each project. MWW is working to keep this effort free of the political
drivers because the program needs to be approached from a technical
and systematic perspective. Selection of mains is very "color
complaint" driven.
k. Fridley Softening Plant Optimization - (Chris Catlin) Due to time
constraints, this agenda topic waS pushed to the April meeting, at
which time the improvements will have b~enimplemented, allowing a
discussion of both the implementation and the results of these efforts.
In short, MWW staff is working to optimize the softening process
through mixing and re-utilizing lime sludge. This will hopefully result in
a reduction of extensive labor and chemicql savings.
I. MCES Regional Water Supply Study Update- (Chris Elvrum)
MCESis undertaking a regional water supply effort to develop a
regional water supply plan by tQ~end.Qf2QO? TDis relates to ground
water availability in the metro area. Barr Engineering is updating the
Metro Ground Water Model to make projections through2050 and
potentially through "ultimate development" of the rn~tro area.
Northwest metro area is an area of real concern where the Prairie du
Chien aquifer runs out. Hope is to develop the process for ongoing
analysis and planning. Metro area is not facing any crisis, but working
towards a plan to develop possible responses to "worst case
seenarios." Ground water model will allow sensitivity analyses such as
continued climate change, drought impacts, worst winter/worst summer
scenario, etc. Also working on ground water contaminant mapping,
submittal process for water appropriation permit:3,comprehensive
planning for water supply, etc. MCES is using Techl1ical Advisory
Groups and Stakeholder Workshops in late February and March.
Workshop is focused upon regional involvement in these scenarios
versus isolated municipalities.
3. Additional Meeting Topics Discussed.-
a. City of Waters Fountain Capital Project - (Shahin Rezania) Mayor RT
Rybak has been speaking extensively recently about marketing the
City's water. Because of the great quality of water in Minneapolis, the
Mayor's idea is to fund the marketing of water by applying $1 million in
funds from the membrane project. Council reduced that to $250K,
which was. 5 fountains at $50,000 each. Provisions were added
through public works and $250,000 was added from other city
departments. Fountains will be artistic drinking water fountains, and
shall not require maintenance from city staff. There are concerns
related to stewardship, sponsorship, maintenance, public safety and
the potential for vandalism.
. b. Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention. Jeff Strand, in a foreclosure
response role for the City, outlined that 5;668 foreclosures occurred in
Hennepin County in2007. Jeff distributed information regarding the
effort to aid and prevent foreclosures from oceurring.
4. Conclusion. (Shahin Rezania) Outlined the future meeting dates as well as
the proposed future MWW topics of discussion.
5. Next Meeting Dates:
a. April 16, 2008
b. September 17, 2008
c. January 14, 2008
6. Potential topics of dis.cussion:
a. Fridley Softening Plant Optimization
b. Pre-Treatment
c. Financial Strategy
d. Infrastructure Funding Bill
e. Water Marketing
f. Water Usage Trends
7. Meeting Adjourned at 4:58 pm