19:12The council’s primary focus was the U main lift station, a vital component of the city’s sewage infrastructure, which faces significant challenges due to its 40-year-old structure and 50-year-old associated infrastructure. The lift station’s low-lying location makes it susceptible to flooding, necessitating immediate measures to prevent water ingress during flood events. The meeting included a presentation on the current condition of the lift station, which highlighted areas at risk of flooding, such as the garage door and manhole covers, all within the flood plain.

26:18Several alternatives for the lift station’s future were proposed, with each option weighing the benefits of new construction versus rehabilitating the existing facility. Four options were discussed: constructing a new main lift station with a dry pit style and dual wet wells, rehabilitating the existing lift station with updated equipment, building a new main lift station with a submersible style, or converting the existing structure into a wet well with submersible pumps. The council considered the operational implications, costs, and structural integrity of each option.

39:12Ultimately, the council eliminated options one and four and focused on further analysis of alternatives two and three. Option two involved rehabilitating the existing lift station, while option three proposed a new submersible style lift station. The decision favored alternative three, which offered a modern design with above-ground access for valves and metering equipment, thereby avoiding confined spaces and facilitating easier maintenance.

51:57Cost estimates for the proposed solutions were presented, with alternative one estimated at $16.3 million and alternatives two, three, and four ranging from approximately $5.2 million to $7.26 million. The council acknowledged the importance of a reliable sewage system, especially considering the projected population growth and potential service demands. The decision to favor alternative three was also influenced by its cost-effectiveness and the potential for maintaining the existing pre-treatment building.

10:43The council also discussed the Intended Use Plan (IUP) and its role in securing funding for the lift station project. Being included in the project priority list was deemed essential for obtaining necessary financing. Although initial funding updates were expected by fall, council members were informed that it was more realistic to anticipate updates by early 2026, depending on bonding availability.

04:21In other business, the meeting addressed personnel matters, including the reclassification of Mitch Lacelt to a journeyman line worker position and the internal advertisement for his current electric distribution supervisor role. Additionally, the council directed staff to create a job description and wage scale for the water distribution supervisor position. These motions received unanimous approval.

06:34The meeting also covered public utility updates, with the public utilities director presenting a preliminary five-year rate study proposal for water, wastewater, and electric rates. Discussions included state-level regulations on surplus energy from solar systems and potential legislative changes to address ratepayer concerns.

01:02:29Further, the council considered a public hearing request for credits on wastewater treatment and collection charges from two customers with basement leaks. After confirming that the water did not enter the city’s wastewater system, the council approved the credit requests, adhering to past practices.

01:04:27In closing remarks, the city administrator reported on an offsite meeting that focused on organizational structure and future priorities. The administrator also noted the upcoming construction of the Country Manor project and the need to fill the vacancy left by the public utilities director’s departure.