03-13-2001 ERMU MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 Regular meeting of the Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission March 13, 2001 Bryan Adams continued the discussion with a Water Tower Site Evaluation. He noted that the Foster property appears to be the best possibility. James Tralle commented on the Site Evaluation, and asked if condemnation proceedings would be a possibility. It is the consensus that condemnation would not be in the best interest of the Utilities. John Dietz commented on the estimated costs in the Site Evaluation. He noted that he feels the property near the tower will develop and build sooner than the five years projected, cutting down the estimated trunk charges as reflected in the Site Evaluation. John Dietz asked if water tests were being done for the Foster property. Bryan Adams responded by saying that weather conditions and snow cover do not permit immediate testing. It was the consensus of the Commission to move ahead with plans to pursue information on the Foster property. 5.3 Update Mechanic Position Staff suggested at the February 15, 2001 meeting that the Commission consider a mechanic position for the Utilities. Staff was directed by John Dietz to assemble a report on the need, and to discuss the possibility of sharing an additional mechanic with the City of Elk River. City and Utility Staff met on 3-01-01. At that meeting the equipment list was reviewed. It was noted that there would be a benefit by sharing personnel, to negate the need for duplicate equipment and shop space. However, with the Utility equipment, and the power plant engine/generation equipment that there would be a necessity for a full-time mechanic, rather than one half-time person. John Dietz asked Phil Halls if he felt that one shop would be a good move. At this time, Phil Halls concurred that it could be done. Phil Halls explained the City method of scheduling vehicle maintenance, with Glenn Sundeen explaining the Utility method. Bob Muhatga questioned who would pay the second mechanic, the City or Utility. James Tralle asked Phil Halls about precedence in vehicle repairs, such as snow plow versus line truck. Phil Halls replied that he is concerned with that problem. John Dietz stated that he would like to eliminate duplication by using one City mechanic, one Utility Mechanic, and using only one shop with scheduling for vehicle maintenance. James Tralle discussed with Staff the need for plant engine maintenance and operation. John Dietz asked Bob Muhatga if he thought that one half time mechanic would be able to do all the maintenance of vehicles for both City and Utility. He responded that it could be done, and that the City is presently working toward the hiring of a maintenance mechanic at this time. James Tralle at this time feels the matter should be tabled until George Zabee returns. John Dietz asked Phil Halls about increasing the present shop size. Phil Halls responded with his views on the re-organization of the Shop. John Dietz then asked for another Staff meeting to discuss this issue. James Tralle moved to table the consideration of a Utility mechanic for one month, to be discussed at the April, 2001 meeting. John Dietz seconded the motion. Motion carried 2-0. John Dietz requested that Phil Halls and Bob Muhatga attend the April, 2001 Utility Commission meeting.