|
Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 6:30 p.m.
1.
Introduction / Call Roll
Chair Jan Vanderwall called the
meeting to order at approximately 6:30 p.m.
Members
Present: Chair Jan Vanderwall; and Members; Jim DeBenedet; Joan Felice;
and Dwayne Stenlund; with Member Steve Gjerdingen arriving at approximately
7:20 p.m.
Staff
Present: Public Works Director Duane Schwartz; City Engineer Debra
Bloom; and Civil/Utility Engineer Ms. Kristine Giga
2. Public Comments
No one appeared to speak at this
time.
3.
Approval of August 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Member DeBenedet moved, Member
Felice seconded, approval of the August 28, 2012, meeting as presented.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
4.
Communication Items
City Engineer Bloom noted that
updates on various construction projects were included in tonight’s meeting
packet, and also available on-line at the City’s website at www.cityofroseville.com/projects;
as detailed in the staff report dated September 25, 2012.
Discussion included the status of private utilities related to the
Josephine Lift Station, with temporary power being provided due to another
temporary setback and delay; and property owners still on hold and being
incredibly patient throughout the delays; anticipated completion of the
Fairview pathway project (concrete) within the next two (2) weeks between
County Road B-2 and County Road B; completion by the City’ Street Maintenance
Division of re-pavement/replacement of sidewalk from Oakcrest north to near
County Road C on the east side, with removal of the old 6’ wide bituminous
pavement necessary due to root damage, and reconstructed as an 8’ concrete
sidewalk.
Further discussion included the
need for replacement of water/sewer services for Josephine Woods due to
previously-installed valve boxes bent over on an old portion of County Road
C-2 when service was extended to certain lots in the 1980’s that were not
maintained well potentially due in part to the slope into the wetland, and
now moved out to the sidewalk, with costs for this correction being paid in
full by the private developer; even with the availability of a policy for
traffic calming and other features along County Road C-2, remaining
disappointment by the majority of residents along the roadway; and an
upcoming meeting of property owners on County Road D for a preliminary plan
review, with the anticipated walkthrough of the proposed amenities in the
project area staked and sprayed out, currently scheduled for October 20,
2012.
Regarding Skillman Pond, Engineer
Giga reported that the majority of the excavation work had been done this
week and should be concluding this week as hydro-seeding proceeded; with the
project receiving good feedback from adjacent neighbors.
Public Works Director Schwartz
advised the Commission that the City Council had reviewed the PWETC
recommended Special Assessment Policy earlier this month, with anticipated
formal adoption in late October or November. Mr. Schwartz noted that the
City Council had specifically asked staff to pass on their appreciation to
the Commission for their hard work on this project and subsequent
recommendation.
Ms. Bloom concurred, noting that
the Council had very few questions after their review of the recommended
draft policy.
Member DeBenedet noted that Ms.
Bloom would be speaking at the October 9, 2012 meeting of the American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) to be held at Midland Hills Country Club.
Ms. Bloom noted that she had also been asked to make a presentation at an
upcoming meeting of the City Engineer’s Association.
5.
Pathway Build Out Plan Committee Appointment and Schedule
Mr. Schwartz summarized this
request to ensure consistency between the Pathway Master Plan priorities and
the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Renewal Program, working along with
staff, as detailed in the staff report dated September 25, 2012.
Mr. Schwartz noted that more
PWETC Members could attend the meetings; however, they would then need to be
noticed if a quorum of members was in attendance.
Member DeBenedet volunteered to
serve, noting that this was an issue in which he had significant interest;
and advised that he intended to attend the meetings whether as a delegate or
as a private citizen.
Member Stenlund also nominated
Member Gjerdingen, not present at the meeting at this time, recognizing his
significant interest in this issue as well.
Member DeBenedet concurred,
noting that if Member Gjerdingen was unable to serve due to scheduling
conflicts, he at least be considered as an Alternate, given his interest in
this issue.
In his role with the School
District’s transportation services, Chair Vanderwall advised that he had an
abiding interest as well, particularly since the build out of County Road B-2
was under consideration, long a near and dear project of interest in his
employment as well as personally. However, Chair Vanderwall recognized that
Member Gjerdingen would also share a strong interest in serving.
Mr. Schwartz advised that, during
initial discussions with City Manager Bill Malinen and Parks & Recreation
Director Lonnie Brokke, they all concurred that it was important to have
School District No. 623 represented, especially with the projects receiving
the highest priority, as well as for their feedback on the entire build out
plan. Mr. Schwartz noted that this interest was further confirmed by the
School District during discussions at a joint meeting of the School Board and
City Council held in June of this year. Mr. Schultz suggested that Chair
Vanderwall would be an excellent choice to represent the School Board, while
serving in the dual capacity as PWETC Chair.
Chair Vanderwall confirmed that
if an invitation was given to the School District, he would be interested in
serving, and recognized Member Gjerdingen as an excellent choice to represent
the PWETC as well.
Member Stenlund moved, Member
DeBenedet seconded, appointment of Members Gjerdingen and DeBenedet, with
Chair Vanderwall as their Alternate to ensure that there would always be two
(2) representatives attending, to serve as the PWETC’s representatives to the
Pathway Build Out Subcommittee.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
Mr. Schwartz advised that he
would consult with the Parks & Recreation Department, as they will lead
the charge and establish a meeting schedule.
After further discussion, staff
advised that they would notice all of the meetings as required by law to
ensure Open Meeting Law provisions were addressed.
6.
Watermain Lining Presentation
Utility Engineer Khristine Giga
provided a presentation specific to several sections of the City’s aging
water main infrastructure identified for an upcoming rehabilitation project,
as detailed in the staff report dated September 25, 2012. Ms. Giga advised
that this project is currently being advertised for bids, with those bids to
be opened on October 10, 2012, and if those bids are favorable, scheduled for
construction in November of this year.
Ms. Giga reviewed two (2) new
technologies in the industry as viable alternatives to open-cut pipe
replacement, and as a way to achieve significant cost-savings while still
extending the life of the existing underground pipe system. Ms. Giga
reviewed the “cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) liner, similar to that used on
sanitary sewer lining projects; and another lining technology developed by 3M
that is a spring-in-place lining system. Ms. Giga reviewed the limited
number of manufacturers providing the CIPP lining system (Insituform,
Aqua-pipe, and Norditube), with the spray-in-place lining system developed
and produced only by 3M. Ms. Giga noted that this new product developed by
3M had not been used for any Minnesota projects to-date, however, it had been
used in other states and in Canada and Europe with climates similar to that
of MN.
Discussion included the process
and chemical make-up of the liner materials; interruption time for services;
cleaning of the lines before installation of the liner materials; and cure
time; with potential to re-establish service connections within the same
day.
Further discussion included
safety concerns, specifically with the new 3M product, and recommendations by
staff to provide affected residents with a “boil notice” for their water use
until bacteria tests were passed, usually within 24-48 hours.
Mr. Schwartz advised that if the
3M product was chosen, staff was recommendation that the City distribute
bottled water to the affected properties for consumption purposes.
Ms. Giga noted that the American
Water Works Association (AWWA) had endorsed the lining products; and the
products were accepted by the non-profit organization looking out for
environmental and citizen public health and safety concerns, the National
Sanitation Foundation (NSF 61) founded in 1944, with the organization having
developed American national standards for all materials and products that
treat or come into contact with drinking water and now having replaced the
former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) advisory standards with
those of NSF 61.
Ms. Giga provided several video
clips, excerpting a Discovery channel documentary about “Aqua-pipe” lining;
and another clip excerpting the 3M Scotchkote Pipe Renewal Liner 2400.
Mr. Schwartz advised that both
different approaches were being considered; and noted that 3M had shown great
interest in partnering with the City to introduce this product in Minnesota.
Mr. Schwartz noted that 3M had seen the product used successfully in Europe
and Canada, and an initial project in the NE portion of the country several
years ago. Mr. Schwartz advised that staff had been in discussions with 3M
on their process for several years; and that they had two (2) national contractors
who also work locally and partner with 3M, who are looking to bid on the
Roseville project with the 3M product as well as the CIPP process.
Mr. Schwartz advised that staff
was seeking feedback from the PWETC on potential use of either process and potential
cost-savings for pipe bypassing. Since pipe bypassing required the bypass
pipe to be located above ground, Mr. Schwartz noted that bacteria issues in
that piping could be of concern during warmer months, but given the timing of
the project, he didn’t see that concern this fall. Mr. Schwartz noted that
the interest in either process is due to potential cost-savings, with bids
seeking by-pass piping as an alternate for one of the segments.
Ms. Giga noted that the segment
for this alternate was on Transit Avenue; however, on the segment along Rice
Street with four (4) apartment buildings potentially affected, staff felt it
would be too difficult to notice all residents about the water.
Mr. Schwartz reiterated that, if
the project was awarded without the bypass, the City should supply bottled
water throughout the duration until boil test water reports are returned safe
for consumption.
Member DeBenedet opined that the
City should be liberal in furnishing bottled water to avoid any issues on
safety and/or taste. While never having tasted water from lined pipes,
Member DeBenedet noted that he had smelled the process during the
Metropolitan Council’s Environmental Services (MCES) sewer interceptor line
process, and the smell had been quite strong during that process.
At the request of Chair
Vanderwall, Member DeBenedet, based on his research during his Cap Stone
project, advised that while staff had consulted with other communities about
their experience using these processes, few communities had used the process
to-date for water lines as it had been a much more expensive process than
lining sanitary sewer lines.
At the request of Chair
Vanderwall, Mr. Schwartz addressed reconstruction of Rice Street in the
future and whether open cut water main replacements would be more cost
effective than the lining. Mr. Schwartz noted that the City had open cut
water main replacements as a part of this year’s Pavement Management Program
(PMP); and advised that the cost depended on how much other utility work and
other components of the project were being done in conjunction, all impacting
the cost. Mr. Schwartz advised that staff thought this year’s project at
$100/foot would prove competitive versus open cut due to the interest
expressed, particularly by 3M in getting their product tested in the market.
Regarding the future of the next
Rice Street reconstruction phase, Mr. Schwartz cautioned that there were
still no guarantees for the project’s timing; and based on a relatively deep
water main section adjacent to wetlands between Transit and County Road C and
other soil concerns, in addition to the challenges with County projects of
late, staff was not recommending a delay. If the bids came in too high, Mr.
Schwartz advised that staff would not recommend moving forward with them;
however, he expressed his anticipation that they will be competitive or lower
than open trenching.
At the request of Chair
Vanderwall, Ms. Giga addressed the spray on methods and any impacts to
potentially brittle cast iron pipes, advising that even if those pipes are
classified as fully deteriorated, the lining product will make it
structurally sound.
At the request of Chair
Vanderwall, Mr. Schwartz advised that there were no concerns for potential
dangers in the excavation and lining equipment inside the pipes, other than
those private lines originally installed for wells serving the Reiling family
properties.
At the request of Chair
Vanderwall, staff confirmed that both processes required pre-cleaning of the
pipes, and there was no cost reduction if less clean-out was needed.
Ms. Giga provided a sample from
an earlier version of the 3M material and confirmed that either of the lining
products had significantly reduced breaks in those pipes.
Mr. Schwartz noted that 3M was
interested in moving into infrastructure rehabilitation in a major way; and
had alluded to staff that they were going to “sharpen their pencils” for this
product in an effort to make a splash and get attention for this market area.
Member DeBenedet noted the lack
of experience to-date for lining products, estimating the full impact and its
useful life experience was an unknown until twenty (20) years down the road.
While currently not having much supporting documentation on how effective the
products would be or how well they would perform, Member DeBenedet opined
that it was worth taking a risk; and if that risk proved to be successful,
the money normally spent on digging and replacing pipes could be used
elsewhere. While there was a potential that the products may prove a poor
choice, Member DeBenedet noted that this would serve as a learning experience
as well, similar to previous methods considered new and inventive in years
past.
Mr. Schwartz opined that, if the
City chose to take that risk, it was somewhat reassuring that it do so with a
company with the experience and reputation of 3M.
Discussion ensued regarding the
use of the 3M product in Europe, now approaching ten (10) years; adoption of
these processes more quickly abroad with less finger-pointing than in the
U.S.; warranty period for the products typically one (1) year, with the
public works industry now moving toward a two (2) year warranty, with some
recent specifications not calling for a warranty, but calling for a
correction period that could go on forever if the contractor was found
negligent.
PWETC members concurred that
staff review the specific warranty periods being offered by bidders on these
products and processes.
Member Stenlund, with concurrence
by the Commission, requested that staff provide and maintain a research
comparison contract table for all three (3) methods (CIPP, 3M product,
open-cut) to track cost benefits and to determine whether the lining worked
better in a 6” and/or 8” diameter pipe over time. Member Stenlund also requested
that staff required that each bidder submit a discharge SWPPP to spell out in
detail their site plan for operation of pit locations, rather than making
assumptions on their intent.
Ms. Giga advised that the City
currently required outside plans, but may consider an addendum with those
items of value mentioned by Member Stenlund and not currently included in the
bid requests.
At the request of Member
Stenlund, Ms. Giga addressed the de-watering pits indicated for each process;
chemical management clean-up costs; pipe flexibility before and after either
type of lining; any cracking data available; whether the lining (e.g. MSDS
on chemical-based products, and other variables. Member Stenlund expressed
his significant interest in the 3M product, noting the interesting
opportunities becoming available with these new technologies. While the 3M
product could provide lining up to 36’ without a pit, Ms. Giga noted that the
City needed to replace some valves with the project anyway, and both
processes allowed could line through the valve and bypass some old ones for
cut-in and replacement in a better location.
Member Gjerdingen arrived at this time, approximately 7:20
p.m.
Recess
Chair Vanderwall briefly recessed the meeting at
approximately 7:21 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 7:25 p.m.
7.
Public Works Strategic Plan Overview
Mr. Schwartz provided the
Commission with an updated 2013-2017 Public Works Department Strategic Plan
that aligned with the strategic directives assigned to Public Works by the
City Council. A bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof,
was also provided further detailing those directives.
Mr. Schwartz reviewed changes
made and those items in process or completed from the previous plan over the
last 3-5 years; and started by providing an overview of the department’s
organizational plan, both current and projected.
Mr. Schwartz advised that, of
significant note related to full-time equivalencies (FTE) for personnel was a
number of upcoming retirements of existing employees, with a reorganization
necessary to address those and facilitate current crew levels that are spread
very thin, with a current management staff level of five (5). Mr. Schwartz
advised that the reorganization intended to spread management duties across a
larger pool, specific to additional water resource and environmental oversight
needs and documentation of utility locations, under a rights-of-way
specialist to consolidate those efforts, including oversight and monitoring
of utility installations by other parties during excavation.
Discussion included
qualifications and training for such a position; and future reorganization
from a fleet/facilities supervisor to a maintenance supervisor rather than
the current outsourcing for small engine repairs/maintenance to serve both
the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Departments.
Mr. Schwartz reviewed each of the
six (6) goals of the department, listed on page 5 of the staff report and
detailed thereafter.
Goal 1
Members Felice and Gjerdingen
expressed concern with the use of the term “customer” versus “citizen,”
opining that “customer” sounded so commercial and their preference for using
“citizen.”
Staff duly noted this feedback.
Member DeBenedet noted that, in
the past, the term “customer” was only used in the private sector rather than
the public sector, based on the theory that customers could determine their
satisfaction levels with service; with current theory supporting that
critique of the public sector as well. Member DeBenedet suggested that
“customer” may not be appropriate, since citizens were actually owners of the
public sector service entity.
Goal 2
Mr. Schwartz reiterated the
concerns in recruiting and retaining specialists in the Public Works arena,
recognizing the institutional knowledge, whether documented or held by those
future retirees; and potential costs and risks to the organization in lowing
that institutional knowledge.
Goal 3
Mr. Schwartz reviewed the
accomplishments made to-date: development and adoption of the Traffic
Management Plan (TMP); water/sewer rates addressed in 2012 and 2013; and
review by the PWETC in the next few months of a tiered structure for
water/sewer rates.
Chair Vanderwall noted the
importance of putting through the second phase in 2013 of the rate structure
to address current and future infrastructure deficits with the water and sewer
systems.
Mr. Schwartz, in addressing the
potential for a tiered water rate system, noted that the state legislature
had recently relaxed requirements for conservation water rates in the last
session based on complaints received.
At the request of Member
Gjerdingen, Mr. Schwartz advised that over 2000 radio-read water meters had
been installed to-date and the technology was working well.
Goal 4
Mr. Schwartz noted that City
Council’s endorsement of continued partnership opportunities, and referenced
the Public Works Department’s good history in achieving those efficiencies
and effectiveness.
Goals 5 and 6
There were no specific discussion
points on these goals that had not already been addressed in previous
comments.
General
Observations/Discussion
Member Gjerdingen asked that,
while on page 2 in the Goal Overview provided a split for street maintenance
between Parks & Recreation and Public Works, that a sentence be added to
include trails. Member Gjerdingen suggested language include such language
in the first goal.
In Goal 4, Member Gjerdingen
asked that a dollar amount be included that would address staff time for
their involvement in collaborating and enhancing partnerships.
Mr. Schwartz advised that those
efforts were considered part of the department’s day-to-day operations as
opportunities are always sought and have many variables; and clarified that
the intent of the Strategic Plan was for funding above and beyond those daily
operations. Mr. Schwartz noted that the dollar amount(s) could actually be
negative numbers if sufficient cost efficiencies were achieved.
Chair Vanderwall concurred with
Mr. Schwartz, opining that it spoke to the openness of the organization to
seek opportunities as they presented themselves, without prior knowledge of
if and when those opportunities may occur.
In Goal 5, Member Gjerdingen
asked that the Master Plans be identified by the date they were last revised
to make them more official.
Staff duly noted this feedback.
On the table for Goal 5, Member
Gjerdingen suggested a more detailed breakdown (e.g. utility costs)
associated with pathway build out, while recognizing that the standard
content was being sought.
Chair Vanderwall noted that the
purpose of the Plan was to provide an overview on a broader level, and
probably not to the level of specifics being suggested by Member Gjerdingen.
Member Gjerdingen suggested that
Goal 6 include an additional sentence addressing how a reduced “carbon
footprint” would be accomplished through addition of another engineer; and
the specific responsibilities of that position that would achieve that
reduction.
Mr. Schwartz advised that those
efforts would be part of the responsibilities of the Environmental Quality
Engineer position.
Discussion ensued on various responsibilities
city-wide for sustainability efforts.
Chair Vanderwall suggested a
better word may be “environmental protection;” or something similar to
address strategies related to environmental stewardship.
Member DeBenedet clarified that
reducing the City’s footprint was related to efforts already underway over
the last two (2) years by the City Council on sustainability, with the Head
Engineer currently dealing with those issues and activities designed to
reduce that footprint.
Member Gjerdingen still
questioned if “carbon” was the right word, and suggested “more efficient
natural resource utilization” may be more applicable.
Member Stenlund spoke in support
of using “environmental protection” to extend the function of and/or save and
protect green space and minimize energy use (e.g. Green Streets program,
recognizing the value of trees, thermo-cooling, water retention).
Member DeBenedet noted that, in
returning to the organizational chart and addition of the Environmental
Engineer position, the Engineer speaks up during internal staff meetings
among departments with options to achieve this goal.
Members concurred that leaving
the language “as is” was prudent, based on this discussion.
On the gas and energy portion,
Member Gjerdingen suggested that a metric to calculate cost savings based on
2012 energy costs would prove more beneficial.
Mr. Schwartz noted that this was difficult with changing costs that may not
actually reflect energy savings, since they went beyond just cost.
Member Felice expressed her
interest in the PWETC’s review of savings to-date in energy and fuel costs.
Member DeBenedet noted that he
suggested the previous Strategic Plan include the term “quality,” however, he
found it lacking in this update. While expressing appreciation in the
identification of protecting the health and safety of employees and the
public, Member DeBenedet expressed interest in seeing a separate and bold
category entitled “Quality,” since it relates to long-term costs being
lowered.
Chair Vanderwall note that the
term was included in the Commitment section.
Member DeBenedet duly noted that,
however, he still advocated for a bold heading for “quality” as a primary
goal or value statement.
Chair Vanderwall noted that
documents such as the Strategic Plan were vetted numerous people via advisory
commissions, staff and the City Council, and many recommendations may not
make it to the final cut.
Member DeBenedet reiterated the
comments of Mr. Schwartz regarding upcoming retirements impacting the departments,
since this was a recurring issue in this type of organization, with students
no longer seeing public works as a career choice. Member DeBenedet expressed
his disappointment in this trend, opining that the Roseville Public Works
Department was currently thinly staffed, while needing to and succeeding in
providing quality services.
Chair Vanderwall opined that many
of the current long-term public works employees nearing retirement had
apparently found value and satisfaction in that field; and stated they were
doing a quality job and must find that they were making a difference.
Member DeBenedet suggested that
somehow that information needed to be conveyed to students as they made their
career choice.
Overall, Member DeBenedet
expressed his satisfaction with and quality of the Strategic Plan document.
Member Stenlund encouraged
Members to review the City Council goals for the Public Works Department,
recognizing the significant amount of work outlined that could impact the
PWETC; and asked that Mr. Schwartz prioritize some of those tasks in the
immediate future; and expressed his excitement going forward with a number of
those projects, whether directly involving the PWETC or receiving some input
from them.
Chair Vanderwall referenced his
meeting with City Manager Malinen earlier this month to discuss a proposed
new policy for advisory commissions to consolidate commission language
overall related to terms, etc. Chair Vanderwall advised that, during those
discussions, he requested that the PWETC be provided with more specific areas
as part of their City Council charge to the Commission as it moved forward.
Chair Vanderwall suggested that the results may be a change in the
Commission’s job description in the future.
Member DeBenedet noted efforts by
the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office to develop comparisons tools for
communities.
Mr. Schwartz noted that this was
similar to past efforts; however, he noted how difficult those comparisons
were due to the differences among cities in their processes and funding
sources.
Member DeBenedet noted
Roseville’s leadership in developing its PMP, and current leadership role for
the twenty (20) year infrastructure for water and sewer systems.
Member Stenlund advised that he
found Goal 2 frustrating in addressing new funding needed, and suggested that
“technology” also be included as a tool. Member Stenlund noted that the
sentence itself was worded awkwardly; and should address providing knowledge
and tools.
As noted by Member Stenlund,
Chair Vanderwall, with Member consensus, asked that staff review the document
for reference to “garbage.”
8.
Asset Management Update
Mr. Schwartz provided a brief
update on the purchase of asset management software to be used city-wide, not
just specifically by the Public Works Department, as detailed in the staff
report dated September 25, 2012. Mr. Schwartz noted a link to the website
for the software chosen: “PubWorks Tracker Software Corporation from CO, at http://pubworks.com/. Mr. Schwartz noted
that the City Council had approved its purchase earlier this month, following
extensive staff research and reviews of a number of products; and advised
that a kick-off meeting with the vendor had been held.
Discussion included hosting of
the system at Roseville by on-site IT staff; integration of data from
existing software programs; generation of service and/or information requests
city-wide by the public; management records to track response times; web and
e-mail assignment to the specific staff/department(s) indicated; exclusion of
integrating data from the current PMP software at this time as it contains
greater analysis tools at a lower cost; direct linkage to as-builts,
maintenance history, with vendors already required to provide data for
integration.
Further discussion included GIS
capabilities and options; photographic support for assets; equipment/vehicle
details for better age and cost analysis, and depreciation; sign inventory
access; creation of work orders from the system for various needs whether
annually recurring or emergencies; cost tracking for completion of work and
liability records; and ease of use by staff and the public of this program.
Members expressed interest in the
report capabilities of the system once in operation, and sharing that data
with the PWEC as applicable.
Mr. Schwartz advised that the
Department’s GIS employee, Jolinda Stapleton, would be leading the
management function and implementing the system, based on her GIS and related
experience with similar systems. Mr. Schwartz noted that the software
company had advised that it had never undergone such a rigorous review as
required by the City of Roseville.
9.
Possible Items for Next Meeting – October 23, 2012
Discussion of items for the next
agenda included:
·
Xcel Energy presentation on their LED streetlight study
Mr. Schwartz advised that Xcel
now had a demonstration study from the City of West St. Paul.
·
Advisory Commission Consistency Proposals
Chair Vanderwall asked that the
document discussed by him and City Manager Malinen to make advisory
commissions consistent in their membership and purposes to support the City Council,
once through the draft stages are shared with the full Commission.
·
County Road D Reconstruction Project Preliminary Design
Member DeBenedet advised that he
intended to attend the October 4, 2012, Public Information Meeting, and
suggested that staff notice it as a public meeting in case any other members
of the PWETC attended.
·
Salt Effectiveness/Impacts
At some future point, Member
Felice requested a discussion on staff’s study of salt on roads and their
effectiveness/impacts.
10.
Adjourn
Member Felice moved, Member
DeBenedet seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:45 p.m.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
|