City Council Minutes 1-2-18

TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING

JANUARY 2, 2018

Members Present:
Diana Doutre
Lyle Holmgren
Jeff Reese
Bret Rohde
Lyle Vance
Roger Fridal, Mayor
Shawn Warnke, City Manager
Linsey Nessen, City Recorder

CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP

Mayor Fridal called the January 2, 2018 City Council Workshop to order at 5:32 p.m. The meeting was held in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Those in attendance were Mayor Fridal, Councilmembers Doutre, Holmgren, Reese, Rohde, and Vance, City Manager Warnke, and City Recorder Nessen. The following Department Heads were also present: Parks and Recreation Director Marc Christensen, Public Works Director Paul Fulgham, Police Chief David Nance, and Treasurer Sharri Oyler. Also in attendance were: City Engineer Chris Breinholt and Finance Director Curtis Roberts.

1. Discussion and review of tasks, policies, strategies, and issues surrounding the implementation of a pressurized secondary water system within Tremonton City’s incorporated limits, which may include, but is not limited to:

 Guiding principles, parameter, and objectives to aid in or affect decision making for implementing secondary water
 Other matters pertaining to the creation of policy and completion of tasks associated with the implementation of a pressurized secondary water system
 Filtration and quality of the water provided to each user
 Cost as compared to what they are currently paying versus what they will be paying in the future
 The cost difference of a partial build out versus a full build out
 Impact that this plan will have on the City’s water consumption and efforts to conserve.
 Implementation of Pressurized Secondary Water System plan/chart

Finance Director Roberts said previous discussion revolved around how many areas to serve and how much the contingency for adjusting costs should be. To help with that, he created a simple input sheet to perform calculations for how much revenue the City can expect, how much the system will cost, as well as finding a range for a monthly rate to users for the secondary water system. This would allow the Council to throw out ideas and see different rates. He gave the example of a 30% contingency with the cost per water shares at $3,500. Councilmember Rohde asked if the contingency were less if it would shrink the bond. Finance Director Roberts said that number could be changed to see how it affects the rate. Councilmember Rohde asked about timeline for bonding and about the $1.5 million figure on the spreadsheet. Finance Director Roberts said the bond would be in place before construction starts and the $1.5 million is how much cash the City has on hand now to help reduce the bond. Councilmember Vance asked Engineer Breinholt how many times he has seen a 30% contingency used up. Engineer Breinholt said we are talking about preliminary engineering at this point. When we get to bonding, we will be closer to the construction design. The contingency would likely not be 30% because we would tighten that budget up a lot. Councilmember Vance said he would like to see the numbers with a 10% contingency. Finance Director Roberts said they could change any of the numbers to see what the rate would be. Right now the assumption built in is a 4% interest rate on a 20-year bond, which is fairly common, and the money in the water fund could be used to buy down the overall cost. The spreadsheet also shows cost by sections. These numbers would focus on service areas 1 through 5. The revenue needs to stay at 125% and in this scenario, the monthly rate would be $45.50. With a 10% contingency, like Councilmember Vance suggested, leaving all other variables the same, the rate would be $39.50. Councilmember Doutre said we would rather say a high monthly rate and go down rather than say a low monthly rate and have to go up.

Councilmember Reese wanted to see the rate for the whole build out with the 10% contingency, which made the rate $54 a month. Councilmember Holmgren wanted to see a 30% contingency for the whole build out, which would be $62. Councilmember Vance said we might be able to save some money by adjusting things. Engineer Breinholt said his preliminary design includes pump stations, service laterals, and lines. It does not include any utilities that may be in conflict with construction of the system or any unique landscaping that may have to be replaced during construction. The contingency of 30% is put in place to pick up some of these other variables that aren’t contemplated on the preliminary design. Every project ends up with those types of variables when you look at the actual design.

Councilmember Rohde said he would like to know the break-even point. Finance Director Roberts said they could do a break-even analysis for each section. Councilmember Rohde also wanted to know the variance number between what people are paying now and what they would be paying. Finance Director Roberts said that would come down to a couple Council decisions further into the process such as whether we are going to charge a flat rate across the entire City or vary the rate based on lot size. There are a number of ways to do it. Right now we are just saying average across each connection, but that can tailored.

Manager Warnke said this spreadsheet is built on a flat rate and assumes that every person pays equally. It does not have an allowance for someone who has a secondary source already—it assumes everyone connects and pays the fee. Finance Director Roberts said if the Council allowed people to opt out, it would raise the rate. Manager Warnke said the hard part is we do not know what that number would be because we do not know how many people have other sources. Engineer Breinholt said it would not be wise to even allow it. Councilmember Reese asked how to stop it. Engineer Breinholt said through ordinance, or maybe make the overage fee so much it forces them. The whole point of secondary water is to save culinary water. Councilmember Vance said we will have a hard time getting a revenue bond if we do not force it—like a tax. Councilmember Doutre said if we go across the board with one price and someone waters a big yard versus someone who waters a much smaller yard—that is hard to tell the person with the small yard it is all the same. Finance Director Roberts said there would be final rate decisions by the Council, but the whole focus of this is to give us a base line average so we have an idea how to proceed.

Councilmember Reese asked if we only did certain sections, if everyone pay the rate even if they were not getting the service. Finance Director Roberts said the way he designed the spreadsheet is it would drop off to just the number of users who could connect. Councilmember Reese said by not connecting it all, some residents will continue to use culinary water on their lawns. To say some citizens can do it because we do not have you hooked up, but the other citizens cannot—that is a hard pill to swallow. Manager Warnke said if we did zones 1 through 5, about 95% of the homes would be connected, which might not meet the philosophic threshold, but from a practical standpoint it does. Director Fulgham agreed if we do zones 1 through 5 with the modifications picking up some of the homes in zones 7 and on the hillside, otherwise it would be 80-85% of homes. Engineer Breinholt said this is not about saving money, because secondary water is not cheaper, it is about saving drinkable water because we have to. The service areas were designed to maximize the money spent. So it depends what our main priority is; to maximize money spent or to connect as many people as possible. Councilmember Vance said we are trying to do both. Director Fulgham said more will come as expansion and growth happens.

Councilmember Doutre asked about peak day water usage, which is about six million gallons. Engineer Breinholt said two-thirds of that is outdoor use and one-third is indoor use, which would be a significant savings if everyone was connected to secondary. Mayor Fridal asked what kind of savings we would see if we had the first five service areas online. Engineer Breinholt said we would save at least half.

Councilmember Vance said the modifications of areas 3 and 7 would change the cost and wondered if anyone knew what a pump would cost on the east side of the canal and bringing it down the State highway, burrowing under the road. Director Fulgham said the only number not provided is the cost to acquire an easement. We try to stay out of the State right-of-way as much as we can. It would cost about $75,000 to acquire the easements (about an acre and a half of property). If we were to go in the State’s right-of-way, we would have to file for permits, which would be in the area of $30,000 with an 8-inch line under the road and that would be modified in the future. There would be one on both sides of the road with a closable valve. Councilmember Vance said that is a perfect scenario, if it is cost effective.

Finance Director Roberts asked if the Council was okay with a 30% contingency and said this would give us the worst case scenario for the modified service areas, changing the rate down to $54.25. With a 10% contingency it would be $47.25. If we decide to do part of the system, we hit a $45 to $48 range across the board, but if we build out more areas, it is anywhere from $53 to $58. Councilmember Reese thanked Finance Director Roberts for his efforts and asked him to send his spreadsheet to the Council so it could be studied further. Director Fulgham said he would send the expanded service areas with the dollar figures to Finance Director Roberts to use in the spreadsheet.

The Council discussed a potential timeline for the secondary water project in conjunction with bonding. Mayor Fridal said this would not happen in a year. We have a significant project that will take multiple years to complete. We will take care of the whole City at some point, but we have to start some place. Councilmember Holmgren said he talked to Mr. Blaine Rupp, who recommended the City get started as whoever is hired to do the project, will have to bring in a lot of people and whole new crews to pull this off. To help with the contingency, he suggested buying the pipe upfront so that price is fixed. Engineer Breinholt said we would not bid the whole project, but would bid each phase. Councilmember Vance wondered if the bank would add the loans together or if we would have five separate loans in the end. Finance Director Roberts said we have lots of options once we narrow it down as to where we think we are going. We can entice bonding agencies to come in because this is going to be a $10 million project and there are going to be lots of funding agencies, who would love to put a bond on because it is pretty much guaranteed money. We can then ask for the most favorable terms and indicate that our construction might last over five years. The bonding is pretty flexible. Realistically, we have so many options it is hard to narrow it down so we are putting in a basis of what we think is possible. Engineer Breinholt said it needs to be done in chunks so local contractors can bid on it. It benefits the local economy and we will save far more money than if we make it so large that they cannot do it. Finance Director Roberts said how we bond could be different than how we bid the project. If we go after other financial sources like grants, then there could be more restrictions that come across with those to help reduce the overall cost. Director Fulgham said federal money has lots of strings attached.

Councilmember Rohde said it really feels like we are doing this and stated that if he is going to be paying $62 more a month than what he is currently paying, he cannot afford that and cannot vote to put something like this in place for those on a fixed income and increase their expenses every month by $30 to $50. We need to see the variance of what citizens are paying now versus what they will be paying. If we said at $56.50 on average it is going to cost each citizen $12.50 more a month, we can deal with that number and it is easier to see how much it is going to cost the citizens each to put the system in place. Director Fulgham said he went through some numbers last month and picked 30 homes from River Valley and Spring Acres Subdivisions, where they have secondary water, and looked at their average monthly water bill, which was $14.48. He then took 30 like homes in Archibald Estates, Holmgren Estates, and Holmgren East and did the calculations. After kicking out the extremes, he found their monthly average was $52.71. The difference for those homes was $38 a month versus those who currently have secondary. Councilmember Holmgren said currently their average is $52.71 a month and we are talking about $56.50 for the secondary water system and clarified that these citizens will hopefully pay the minimum for culinary water each month plus the $56.50. Director Fulgham said if that is the scenario we go with, that would be a $70 a month payment, but $52.71 is not the average of all those in town. If you look at everybody throughout town their overage is going to run them in the $40 to $45 a month range.

Councilmember Vance asked, now that we have all the data, how much time it would take for someone to put it in a spreadsheet. Director Fulgham said he and Treasurer Oyler would work on it. Councilmember Reese said that is the way we have to sell it, we will have to show citizens what we are doing. It is not a cost savings, we need the water, but it is still a selling point to the citizens. Councilmember Rohde said it kind of comes down to the UTOPIA thing of forcing someone into a utility and asked if we have that right. It feels like we are going with secondary water, but have we really come to that decision. Is it going to be too expensive to the citizens to move forward and if it is, what are the other options and will they be more expensive. Manager Warnke said on January 10, there is a meeting with the State to talk about ground water appropriations, which will reaffirm what some of the options are. The only other option that might be out there is buying water from the conservancy district or purchasing a well. Director Fulgham said in the next 30 years, we talked about it costing $30 million dollars for infrastructure for culinary water versus $15 million for secondary water. As we build out, the impact fees from the culinary water, because part of culinary water is secondary, can go into paying for the infrastructure. We would have to spend upward of $30 million for source development, additional storage and line capacity to get the water across the valley to us or we spend $15 million to do secondary. Then we do not have to do anything with our sources for several years. Unless we have big growth, we are good until 2070 for storage and line capacity size. Engineer Breinholt said the expansion of culinary water in this area is going to be limited. If we do not take some of the pressure off of that system, then we have to stop growth sometime in the near future. Councilmember Rohde said secondary feels right, but asked if citizens can afford it and if they have a choice. Engineer Breinholt said we have no option. Whether we do it now or a Council does it in 10 years, it has to happen. Councilmember Reese disagreed and asked to see where we compare with other communities that have secondary water.

Mayor Fridal asked if someone with a small lot is going to be charged the same amount as someone with more acreage. Those with big lots have to pay more, but it is unknown how to do that. Councilmember Rhode said it is a Council decision. Director Fulgham said that would become a nightmare for Treasurer Oyler, but we could set rates based on different lot sizes. Once they had a program built, it would be easy. Councilmember Rohde said it would be nice to know what other cities are paying to help us make a decision. Finance Director Roberts said some areas do subsidize their culinary rates through a property tax, which distorts the water rates. The Council asked about Richmond’s system. Councilmember Rohde said we need a couple more questions answered and then we should be ready to go.

Manager Warnke said staff would provide the Council with other city’s water rates and then we are about to a point where we can create a financing plan. In order to do that, we have to have some Council direction on what phases to build out so we know the parameters. Finance Director Roberts said we have to know if we are going for $15 million to build it out over all 12 areas, which could be a five-year project, while areas 1 through 5 might be a three-year project—that is going to affect future financing. Councilmember Rohde asked if there were any advantages to having a hook up fee. Director Fulgham said that helps pay down the cost a bit, but that is all up to the Council. Engineer Breinholt said we want to make sure they connect so keep that in mind when you make that decision.

Councilmember Vance asked if homeowners would have to install their own filtration system. Engineer Breinholt said they should, but do not have to. The design includes a filter at the pump station, but things can grow inside the line. In most cases, people will install a home filter. Director Fulgham said we are currently using a 200-300 micron filter, but most people on the hillside have put in their own secondary filter to help flush it. Engineer Breinholt said a home filter is not expensive (about $100). Director Fulgham explained two types of filters. A y-strainer, which is about $20 and a self cleaning filter that works off pressure for about $250. He said we will educate the public on filters at the home and suggest the best sprinkler heads for canal water.

Motion by Councilmember Vance to move into closed session. Motion seconded by Councilmember Reese. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

The Council moved into a closed session at 6:49 p.m.

2. CLOSED SESSIONS:

a. Strategy session to discuss the purchase of real property when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; and/or
b. Strategy session to discuss the character, professional competence or physical or mental health of an individual; and/or
c. Strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation

Motion by Councilmember Doutre to return to open session. Motion seconded by Councilmember Reese. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

The Council returned to open session at 6:57 p.m.

The meeting adjourned at 6:58 p.m. by consensus of the Council.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Mayor Fridal called the January 2, 2018 City Council Meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tremonton City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Those in attendance were Mayor Fridal, Councilmembers Doutre, Holmgren, Reese, Rohde, and Vance, City Manager Warnke, and City Recorder Nessen. The following Department Heads were also present: Parks and Recreation Director Marc Christensen, Public Works Director Paul Fulgham, Police Chief David Nance, and Treasurer Sharri Oyler (arrived at 7:08 p.m.). Also in attendance were: City Engineer Chris Breinholt, Finance Director Roberts (left at 7:39 p.m.), Brad Rasmussen (left at 7:38 p.m.) and Officer Todd Hunsaker (arrived at 6:45 p.m. and left at 7:35 p.m.).

1. Opening Ceremony:

Mayor Fridal informed the audience that he had received no written or oral request to participate in the Opening Ceremony. He asked anyone who may be offended by listening to a prayer to step out into the lobby for this portion of the meeting. The prayer was offered by Finance Director Roberts and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Officer Hunsaker.

2. Introduction of guests:

Mayor Fridal welcomed those in attendance.

3. Oath of Office for Elected Officials

a. Roger Fridal, Mayor
b. Lyle Holmgren, Councilmember
c. Bret Rohde, Councilmember

Recorder Nessen led Mayor Friday and Councilmembers Holmgren and Rohde in the Oath of Office.

4. Approval of Agenda:

Motion by Councilmember Vance to approve the agenda of January 2, 2018. Motion seconded by Councilmember Doutre. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

5. Approval of minutes – December 5, 2017

Motion by Councilmember Holmgren to approve the minutes of December 5, 2017. Motion seconded by Councilmember Rohde. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

6. Presentations

a. Tremonton City Financial Statements ending June 30, 2017- Curtis Roberts, Tremonton City Finance Director

This item was tabled—City staff is still working on it.

b. Wastewater Treatment Plant Capital Facilities Plan, Impact Fee Facilities Plan, and Impact Fee Analysis – Brad Rasmussen

Mr. Rasmussen presented the Council with information for projects they will be working on through the year. Mr. Rasmussen said it was about two years ago when his company did this presentation once before. There were questions as to whether Garland City was going to be here or not so we redid it assuming Garland is leaving and as far as we know, that is still happening. Once they leave, it frees up some capacity. Mr. Rasmussen showed a chart showing their projection of growth for wastewater flow and population in Tremonton. The City is pushing capacity (1.9 MGD), but when Garland leaves, that drops down to 1.5, which will take us out to about 2032. There are some additions to talk about, but we looked out farther to a 2.5 MGD facility, which will take us out to 2050 and then to 2070. That is the basis of what our growth projections were, which we broke into a few phases. Since some time has gone by since we started this, we have to combine phase one and two. For phase one, we were limited by our solids handling so we are going to add some additional equipment. The State is enacting a new phosphorus rule and so we are going to add some basins that let us remove nitrogen and phosphorus for phase 2. Those projects need to be started immediately. That gives us two years to design, bid, and construct. By 2020 we need to meet the phosphorus discharge limit. Phase three and four are out there a ways, but phase three expands some of the capacity of aeration basins, upgrades the head works, and adds quite a few different options to expand the plant—further out is more expansion.

Councilmember Doutre asked if we have money set aside for this project. Manager Warnke said we have been appropriating money for the solids handling project for the last couple of years. We have budgets for that, but not for the phosphorus removal. Mr. Rasmussen said it would cost about $800,000 for the solids handling and then $1.4 million for the phosphorus removal. Director Fulgham said we instituted a rate structure increase to raise our rates from $18.50 to $28.50 over a four-year period and this January billing will be the last step of that. It will go up another $2.75 to get us to the $28.50 that we felt we needed to be able to fund these projects. This project is regulatory and is not impact fee related. The growth of the solids handling is impact fee related so some of that money comes from impact fees and some comes from the rate structure. Finance Director Roberts said we have enough cash on hand to do that, but it will drain the cash from the Wastewater fund.

Councilmember Holmgren asked if the phosphorus removal could benefit us when talking about secondary water options. Director Fulgham said this would not impact secondary water, it just makes it less phosphorus rich water. Mr. Rasmussen said we, as a City, are under a discharge permit and we have to meet the State’s requirements or fines are associated with it. Our numbers look pretty good compared to other areas and what they have to put into a new plant.

Manager Warnke said as it relates to what it does to the impact fee for single family, it increases about $320 so it will change the impact fee to $1,700 and for multi-family it is a $210 increase. Mr. Rasmussen said our first phase is dewatering and taking more solids out. This will increase the capacity of the plant so it can take more solids out of the existing facility. It is a small addition that makes it work like it should. Director Fulgham said all impact fees can build is capacity in the plant. The phosphorus removal is a regulatory item so that is why we had a rate increase four years ago to bring us up from $18.50 to $28.50 a month so we could meet the nutrient removal required by regulatory law. Councilmember Doutre asked if this would be effective right away. Manager Warnke said it would be effective after 90 days.

Councilmember Holmgren asked for an explanation on why when Garland leaves and we increase our capacity, we also need these improvements for additional capacity. Mr. Rasmussen said impact fees are developed on two components, one is when new people connect—they are buying their portion of the existing plant. To put that in, we took all the previous costs and projects since the plant was brand new and divided it out by how many people could connect. When Garland goes out, people are still paying for the existing capacity in the plant plus the additional pieces we added. It is a combination of all that. Mr. Rasmussen also talked about the maximum allowable amount that the Council could charge and said when we start looking at what the City paid for the existing infrastructure, we cannot come close to replacing it. It makes sense to keep that up to the maximum amount so people who are coming on and using that existing capacity, which in this case has been paid for by existing people, it allows us to use that money for other future projects and optimize the amount of revenue we can get from impact fees. We have already spent that money and people have already paid for it so it offsets those future costs to existing people by that impact fee. Councilmember Holmgren asked how our impact fees compare to neighboring communities. Director Fulgham said we are not higher than anyone, we are lower than most. They further discussed Garland and how that would affect the City once they were off the system. Director Fulgham explained that Garland contributes very little to solids, but does affect flow. They give us about 400,000 gallons a day in flow capacity, but we still have loading because we have industry. By taking Garland out and giving us a lot of flow, that will reduce the impact fee because we do not have to build large capacity to handle the flow, we just have to address the solids issue. Garland’s project has not been designed or bid and will likely be early summer 2019 before they are off the system.

7. Public comments: Comments limited to three minutes.

There were no public comments.

8. Public Hearing on consideration of adopting:

a. Ordinance No. 18-01 adopting a capital facilities plan and Impact Fee Facilities Plan for the Wastewater Treatment Plant

Opened at 7:34 p.m. and closed at 7:35 p.m. There were 10 people in attendance.

b. Ordinance No. 18-02 adopting Wastewater Treatment Plant Impact Fee Enactment, including, but not limited to, adopting an Impact Fee Analysis

Opened at 7:35 p.m. and closed at 7:36 p.m. There were 10 people in attendance.

9. New Council Business:

a. Discussion and consideration of approving Ordinance No. 18-01 adopting a Capital Facilities Plan and Impact Fee Facilities Plan for the Wastewater Treatment Plant

Motion by Councilmember Holmgren to approve the ordinance and adopt the Capital Facilities Plan and Impact Fee Facilities Plan. Motion seconded by Councilmember Vance. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

b. Discussion and consideration of approving Ordinance No. 18-02 adopting and enacting impact fees for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, including, but not limited to, adopting an Impact Fee Analysis

Motion by Councilmember Reese to approve Ordinance 18-02. Motion seconded by Councilmember Holmgren. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

c. Discussion and consideration of adopting the audited Tremonton City Financial Statements ending June 30, 2017

This item was tabled.

d. Discussion and consideration of approving the November Financial Statements

Motion by Councilmember Reese to approve the November Financial Statements. Motion seconded by Councilmember Rohde. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

e. Discussion and consideration of adopting Resolution No. 18-01 authorizing and sanctioning Lexipol policies as an additional employee personnel and policy manual for Tremonton City Police and Fire Departments and granting authority to certain administrative staff to customize (amend Lexipol) polices without the City Council review and approval

Manager Warnke said the Police Department has been subscribing to Lexipol, a policy subscription for public safety, for many years. It is very specific and follows the best practices, but also has case law, so the policies are drafted by those in the industry and have legal review. A lot of cities use this as an expert policy on public safety. A short time ago, the Fire Department purchased this as well. It came in really handy when they had an UOSH inspection. However, they have never been formally recognized by the Council as additional policies and we think there is good reason for that. We request that the City Council approve and authorize those as additional policies that are applicable so it is clarified. Lexipol is a template policy manual, but it does allow for alterations and amendments specific to Tremonton City. We think the best people to do that is Chief Nance, Recorder Nessen, and Manager Warnke. We can bring all those policies to the Council, but it would be about 600 pages. On occasion, Lexipol automatically updates because of case law. Manager Warnke said we are asking the Council to authorize these policies and delegate authority to individuals to make amendments and put it into play. It is a great service and provides daily training. Chief Nance said it helps the officers understand the policies a bit better. It is very time consuming otherwise to keep on top of everything.

Motion by Councilmember Doutre to adopt the resolution and authorize certain administrative staff to customize policies without coming to the City Council. Motion seconded by Councilmember Vance. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

f. Discussion and consideration of adopting Resolution No. 18-02 amending Section I: General Policies and Section XVI: Benefits of the Tremonton City Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual
Manager Warnke said there are a few additional concepts he thought would be helpful for the City’s policy. It also formalizes what the Council already approved in the other resolution—more or less codifying it within the current policy manual.

City staff had a conversation with the Fire Department about the policy for when employees and their dependents, who live in their home, need ambulance services. The City would bill the insurance company and then write off the balance, but it conflicts with Medicare’s policies and puts the City in jeopardy on the Medicare payments. In order to comply with Medicare’s rules, it is being proposed that we delete that policy.

Motion by Councilmember Rohde to adopt the resolution as stated. Motion seconded by Councilmember Holmgren. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

g. Discussion and consideration of adopting Resolution No. 18-03 approving a new lease agreement for a copier/printer/scanner/fax at the Civic Center, and the purchase of the existing copiers used at the Recreation Department and Police Department and a service agreement for the copiers/printers/scanners/fax machines at the Civic Center, Recreation Building and Police Department

Manager Warnke said we have five months left on our current lease so we would still have to finish out those payments ($450 a month). The issue we are running into is operationally we are experiencing times when a copier is down and although we do have a service agreement where they fix it, it becomes an inconvenience of being offline for a time, but as a staff we can make it work. This copy machine and printer does carry a lot of volume. Councilmember Reese asked if City staff is becoming more electronic. Treasurer Oyler said yes, but the machine is also used for scanning. Director Christensen said on a monthly basis the machine makes more than 5,000 black and white copies and more than 4,000 colored copies. Manager Warnke said City staff will live with what the Council thinks is prudent, but if we did it now, we would be paying off part of the lease and paying $2,200 more than if we waited. Councilmember Rohde clarified we are going to purchase the two older machines at the end of their lease for $1,477 each, which will stay at the Recreation and Police Departments. Director Christensen said yes and we anticipate they will stay there for five years on a continuing service contract. Councilmember Rohde clarified that we still want to lease another copier for $593 a month and asked why we would lease it versus buy it. Manager Warnke said we could buy it. The difference when paying for interest is $381 a year or $1,900 for the lease, with part of that paying off the remaining five months the City owes for the current lease. We could save $1,900 if we purchased it outright. Councilmember Rohde said if we have the money now, we purchase it outright. Councilmember Reese wanted some clarification on what was before them and wanted to go with the cheaper option. Manager Warnke said the first cheapest option is to let us go for five months, continue to make service calls as needed and keep the current machine going. The second cheapest would be what Councilmember Rohde is saying, to purchase the machine. Or we could lease it. Les Olsen is willing to discount the machine for purchase and they will continue to service it too. From an operational standpoint to be more efficient, Manager Warnke made the recommendation that we purchase the copier. Councilmember Vance asked how much more the service contract would be on top of that for the three copiers, which will be $351 a month. This covers all services, ink, toners and maintenance calls.

Motion by Councilmember Rohde to move forward with the resolution and purchase the machine now, along with the other two machines. Motion seconded by Councilmember Reese. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

h. Discussion and consideration of approving Resolution No. 18-04 reaffirming, amending, and enacting new fees and fines in a schedule entitled Tremonton City consolidated fees and fines schedule including, but not limited to, amendments to the fees for parking during winter months

Chief Nance said last year the Council passed an ordinance for parking on the streets during the winter months (starting December through the end of February). This is an infraction with a fine of $50. Police officers gave plenty of warnings in the later part of November and December. After Christmas, Chief Nance gave his officers the go ahead to issue citations.

The public has been reminded about this ordinance through social media and in the newspaper, making a good effort to get the word out. Since December 27, 2017 there have been about 96 citations issued and a lot of warnings were given out, some were even given out twice with residents continuing to keep their vehicle on the street. It is a pain to warn people twice before issuing a citation because we have to go back and check. Our officers do this in their spare time because parking citations are not something we do a lot of. We feel it is important to get people in the habit of getting their vehicles off the street so roads can be plowed when the need arises. This is a very common ordinance throughout the State, but it is a learning curve for people to get them to a point where they realize what is going on. A lot of people just ignored the warnings.

Mayor Fridal said because it never snowed, citizens saw no issue. Chief Nance said people relate it to the snow, but the ordinance does not talk about snow specifically it is for the winter months. It has a lot to do with finding a place to get their vehicles off the street. Chief Nance said he drove around the City during an early morning and there were a large amount of cars on the street shortly after a snowstorm. Councilmember Rohde asked if officers are checking and hitting the whole City equally. Chief Nance said they were and confirmed it is only during the nighttime hours that this applies. One night an officer issued 46 citations, but most of the time they have about 16.
Chief Nance asked if the Council wanted to change the $50 fee. He suggested having it increase so the second citation would cost more—enough to where it hurts. Councilmember Reese agreed with having the cost graduate such as the first ticket being $25 and any subsequent tickets being $50. Councilmember Reese also expressed his appreciation for warnings being issued the first time. Manager Warnke said we have not talked to the Judge or City Attorney yet and are not sure if an infraction could be enhanceable and suggested we make the motion with an alternative option. After clarification, the decision will go into effect immediately.

Motion by Councilmember Reese to approve a $25 first time offense and $50 second time offense—pending permission from the Judge. Motion seconded by Councilmember Doutre. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

10. Discussion of values and mission statement – Councilmember Rohde

Councilmember Rohde said with the holidays, he did not get a lot of input and would like to push it off. He will send emails to remind the Council.

11. Calendar Items and Previous Assignments

a. Review of calendar

On January 10, at 3 p.m., at the Bear River Water Conservancy District there will be a public meeting with the State on ground water and to discuss the drainage basin.

b. Review of past assignments

There were no items to discuss at this time.

12. Reports & Comments:

a. City Manager Reports and Comments
b. City Department Head Reports and Comments
c. Council Reports and Comments

Councilmember Vance reminded the Council about the upcoming Chamber of Commerce dinner on January 19 at the fairgrounds. He suggested the Council attend. Manager Warnke said the City would register those who are interested in going and representing the City.

Mayor Fridal asked about current assignments and if the Council was comfortable with them, which they were.

13. CLOSED SESSIONS: no closed session was held at this time

14. Adjournment.

Motion by Councilmember Rohde to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by Councilmember Doutre. Vote: Councilmember Doutre – aye, Councilmember Holmgren – aye, Councilmember Reese – aye, Councilmember Rohde – aye, Councilmember Vance – aye. Motion approved.

The meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m.

The undersigned duly acting and appointed Recorder for Tremonton City Corporation hereby certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes for the City Council Meeting held on the above referenced date. Minutes were prepared by Jessica Tanner.

Dated this 6th day of February, 2018.

Linsey Nessen, City Recorder

Follow-up items for the Council and City Staff
Councilmember Rohde will send an email to the Council reminding them to come up with ideas for the mission statement and values. Councilmembers are to provide input and suggestions.

Finance Director Roberts will take the information that Director Fulgham has sent him and adjust the spreadsheet to help them further determine secondary water rates. He will also look into a break-even analysis for each section.

Director Fulgham and Treasurer Oyler will work on adding the data to a spreadsheet and come back with more numbers for secondary water.

City staff will find out more information on Richmond’s system and provide the Council with other city’s water rates.

Archives