Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GUS_10.21.2003 Minutes of the Meeting of the Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, October 21, 2003 The Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Tuesday , October 21, 2003. Board Members Present: Stanley Bland, John Gavurnik, Doug Smith, Kendall Young, Larry Brown, Jack Hunnicutt (arrived at 2:02 P.M.) Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Paul Brandenburg, Jim Briggs, Laura Wilkins, Mike Stasny, Micki Rundell, Joel Weaver, John Aldridge, Glenn Dishong, David Munk, Mike Mayben, Terri Calhoun, Amelia Sondgeroth OTHERS PRESENT: David Patrick - RPK Engineering, John Kirby - Council Member Minutes Regular Meeting Call to Order at 02:00 PM Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the President, a Board Member, the Assistant City Manager, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows REGULAR SESSION: A. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the regular meeting held September 16, 2003. Laura Wilkins DISCUSSION: Smith stated that the meeting was called to order by Doug Smith not Ken Evans. ACTION: Motion by Gavurnik, second by Bland to approve the minutes as amended. Approved 5-0 (Hunnicutt not present for this vote and Evans absent) B. Review of the Construction Progress Report and timelines (including but not limited to items listed). Joel Weaver DISCUSSION: Weaver gave information on projects. ACTION: NONE C. Consideration and possible recommendation to perform the second phase of GSWW Edwards Aquifer Program testing and to approve the annual budget of $180,000.00 Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Dishong explained the project. Edwards Aquifer Rules require us to do this testing. Eight year project - 110,000 feet per year. Smoke testing and then other testing at potential flaw areas. Showed on the utility map areas to be tested this year. 90% - 95% of the Dove Springs area to be tested this year. Preparatory cleaning is included - but since we have the new vac truck - we can do this work ourselves. Question from Young regarding the training included. Answered by Dishong that we want to learn how to do some of the testing so we could maybe take on some of this at lesser expense later. Question from Smith about how the testing is performed. Answered by Dishong that smoke is inserted into the main. If smoke comes up from the ground - then that is an area where there is a potential leak in the system. Next step is manhole inspection. Last step is pressure or vacuum testing and then repair. Question from Young how many staff of the City will be trained? Answered all wastewater staff ( approximately 10 people). Question from Gavurnik about if we have to start over testing after we get done with the 5 years? Dishong answered that we have initially 8 years to do the first round of testing - after that we have to increase footage and test the entire system every 5 years. We are testing a mixture of old clay pipe and newer PVC to control repair costs. Once problem is identified - we have 365 days to repair. So, it is wise to try to control the repair costs by testing some older and some newer areas. Dishong explained the notification procedure for each day's testing. Briggs addressed how we plan to handle private property leaks. We will need to set up some sort of program to make it fairly simple for private property owners to make repairs - but will have to turn over to the TCEQ if we make several attempts and property owner does not repair. ACTION: Motion by Gavurnik, second by Bland that the Board recommend to Council approval of the second phase of GSWW Edwards Aquifer Program testing and approve the annual budget of $180,000.00. Approved 6-0 (Evans absent) D. Consideration and possible recommendation to appro ve the purchase of Bioxide chemicals from U.S. Filter/Davis Process Products, of Sarasota, Florida, in an amount not to exceed $75,000.00 Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Dishong explained the item. Question from Bland about how much was spent last year. Answered by Dishong that we spent all $75,000. Smith asked - Does H2S ever get to a high enough level to be dangerous? Dishong answered that it can but has not gotten to that level in Georgetown. ACTION: Motion by Hunnicutt, second by Gavurnik that board recommend to Council purchase of Bioxide from US Filter/Davis Process. Approved 6-0 (Evans Absent) E. Consideration and recommendation to award the annual bid for Water Meters and Accessories to National Waterworks. Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Dishong explained the bid. Passed around an ERT and end cap. Question from Bland about total cost of each complete set. Answered by Dishong. Question from Bland as to why only one bidder. Answered by Dishong that we only have one supplier of Precision meters (ITRON). Briggs stated that we ran a test on several brands of meter and that Precision was the best. Then we started using the reed switches. Badger did not have the accuracy that we required. Brown asked where the tota lization of the meter recorded and held? Dishong answered that the actual read comes from the ERT to CCU's and is stored here at Utility Billing. Question from Young if the meter registers total usage? Answered by Briggs - yes the meter keeps the total amount of gallons used. Brown - is there a way to lose the reading? Answered by Dishong and Briggs - there is a battery inside that is good for 10 years. Sends reading every hour. If it stops reading - the meter keeps track and you can re-sync up the meter and the ERT. ACTION: Motion by Young, second by Brown that this bid be recommended for award to Council. Approved 6-0 (Evans absent) F. Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment between the City of Georgetown and Roming, Parker & Kasberg L.L.P. for professional services relating to the design the Phase I EARZ remediation. Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Item explained by Dishong. Showed the "flaw" exfiltration report from last year's testing. This project is for design and engineering for the repairs. RPK will prepare documents to put the repairs out to bid. 467 flaws found last year. Total is about $1.5 million (including testing and engineering). Gavurnik asked about how old these areas were. Answered by Dishong - not that old - but quite a few manholes needed to be repaired. Rundell explained that the rate increase will pay for this work and they were implemented in anticipation of paying for these repairs. Once we go through the system completely and then begin the second round - it is possible that the repairs will be slightly less than the $1,500,000.00. ACTION: Motion by Gavurnik, second by Bland that board recommend to Council approval of the contract with Roming, Park & Kasberg to provide services for this design in the amount of $109,000. Approved 6-0 (Evans absent) G. Discussion and possible recommendation of the Line Extension Policy for Water and Wastewater Utilities. Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Dishong gave history on this policy. We are now in need of a Line Extension policy for the UDC. Policy is now coming to the Board with a policy that does not go into Subsequent User Fees - only a Line Extension Policy. City to participate but only for projects that are on the CIP and at the same time line that the project may have been on the City's 5-Year CIP. Gavurnik asked about previous proposal on the Subsequent User Fees. Dishong explained that we are on short time frame to get something into the UDC for Line Extension purposes. Representatives from Pinnacle are at the meeting - would like to have water and wastewater in the near future. Project is in the Water CIP but for 05/06. Glenn's proposal would allow the installation of the line - and the City will participate - but we would pay our portion in 05/06 rather than now. Briggs explained the two issues. Brown suggested that we visit with TML to see if they have found a way to deal with this issue or if they have studied this issue. Could we rebate back some of the cost of the impact fee for projects that are on the CIP listing? Sondgeroth has comment related to the timing (after plat is approved by Council) still some unknowns. We are trying to get a many "knowns" as possible into the process - therefore she suggests that it be concurrent with the plat process. Need to get this policy confirmed and approved by the end of the year. Gavurnik asked if it would be appropriate to hear from the Pinnacle group at this time. Smith says he would like to avoid "leap frogging" in the system - he feels that developing outside the CIP is sort of the penalty for doing that. Hunnicutt says that currently there is a huge penalty for "leap frogging" in the system as there is not a policy in place. Hunnicutt agrees that Brown's suggestion is good place to start (rather than re-creating the wheel). Bob Felton of Cottonwood Development spoke to the board regarding his proposed developm ent (700-800 lots) in the next five years. They would like to have an agreement with the City for services. Water is in the CIP but Wastewater is not in the next 10 years CIP. Hunnicutt asked what year the water line is in the CIP? Answered by Dishong - 05/06. City would reimburse in 05/06. No credit on impact fee as they are under the old impact fees. ACTION: Motion by Young second by Gavurnik that the policy be amended as suggested by Amelia (paragraph B3 - timing be approved by Council concurrent with preliminary plat agreement) and that it be recommended to the Council. Before the vote - Gavurnik asked if a committee could be formed to review the areas. Briggs recommended that we move forward with the approval of the policy and then at the next meeting we could talk about a committee and the role of the committee. Smith said he does not want to encourage development outside the CIP. Approved 6-0 (Evans absent) NEXT MEETING - DISCUSSION REGARDING A COMMITTEE. H. Review and possible recommendation to amend the General Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Camp, Dresser, and McKee (CDM) for engineering services related to the design of the off -site wastewater improvements for the Wolf Ranch Project. Glenn Dishong DISCUSSION: Dishong explained the projects for Wolf Ranch. Briggs discussed Financial Impact. Young asked if all the details had been approved through the TCEQ. ACTION: Motion by Gavurnik, second by Hunnicutt that the board recommend to Council to amend the General Services Agreement between the City and CDM for design of the off -site wastewater improvements for the Wolf Ranch Project. Approved 6-0 (Evans Absent) Board to Recess Regular Session to hold Executive Session EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION: Call to Order In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session that follows. Sec.551.086 Competitive Matters The GUS Board will go into Executive Session under Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code to discuss matters or take action on a “competitive matter” of the Energy Services Department as provided under Section 551.086. I. Consideration and possible recommendation related to future generation resource plans for portions of the City of Georgetown load as requested by the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA). Jim Briggs and Michael W. Mayben DISCUSSION: ON TAPE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ADJOURN Adjourned at 5:21 p.m. REGULAR SESSION TO RECONVENE Regular Session reconvened at 5:22 p.m. J. Possible action from Executive Session DISCUSSION: NONE ACTION: NONE ADJOURNMENT Hunnicutt, Gavurnik Approved 6-0 Evans Absent 5:22 p.m. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 PM. Approved : Attest: _______________________ ________________________ Board Member Name Secretary