HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/21/1992URBAN AFFAIRS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
January 21, 1992
1. CALL TO ORDER
The January 21, 1992 meeting of the Apple Valley Urban Affairs Advisory Committee was
called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman John McKay.
Members Present: Chairman John McKay, Members Shirley Doering, Sharon Schwartz,
Van Holston, and Councilman Robert Erickson.
Members Absent: Pam Sohlberg, JoAnne Ellison, and Robin Curran.
Staff Present: Mary Mueller, Terry Cook, and Scott Hickok.
Others Present: Cindy Webster, Peggy Tittle-Swaim, Sue Nathan, and Debbie Wold.
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 21, 1992.
4. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Energy Grant Program
-Scott Hickok-
Scott Hickok introduced the topic of the Apple Valley Energy Grant Program In the
introduction, Hickok asked each of the individuals in attendance to introduce themselves and state
if they were a Committee Member, Self Reliance Center (SRC) representative, Minnegasco
representative, staff,. etc. Hickok continued by reviewing a brief history of the Energy Conservation
Program in Apple Valley.
Peggy Tittle-Swaim, Self Reliance Center (SRC) representative explained the energy use
evaluation aspects of the program. Swaim continued by stating that in many cases, the information
that is provided through this program will result in a 25°/a reduction in energy consumption in a
residence. Swaim also explained that for each energy audit SRC performs, $80.00 is provided by
Minnegasco. The State Grant Apple Valley received also helps to pay for the cost of each inspection.
Councilman Bob Erickson stated that he had a negative experience with an energy audit where
he was told that he needed to spend $5,000.00 on new windows. Erickson asked about what type
of recommendations are given and whether or not "Bag Ticket" items like new windows are typically
recommended. Swaim responded by saying that the technicians that perform the evaluations are not
in any way affiliated with sales of products.
Urban Affairs Advisory Committee Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 2
Sue Nathan, Minnegasco representative, added information regarding knowledge of certain
"Energy Audit" programs that were focused on sales not energy conservation. Because of those
programs, both Minnegasco and Self Reliance Center are extremely careful to train their auditors,
and to oversee that the recommendations are conservation-focused, not sales-focused. Nathan added
that many of the recommendations involve low or no cost improvements which can be made. Nathan
concluded by stating that in some cases they were getting requests to evaluate homes of individuals
who are Dakota Electric customers. Those individuals have been redirected to Dakota Electric. The
Dakota Electric audits are performed by contract auditors whom Dakota Electric has hired.
Shirley Doering commented on chimney caps and attic fans as energy conservation devices.
Swaim discussed elements of the New Hope Program which has been designed to include all
residents whether they are gas, electric, oil, etc.
Hickok added that Dakota Electric has been invited to participate in our program, but as of
yet, their program is independent.
Nathan explained pre/post 1980 requirements and what those requirements have meant to
Minnegasco's energy conservation effort. Nathan also gave examples of simple things that can be
done by homeowners to conserve energy.
Shirley Doering asked about low-income individuals, who do not have a means of correcting
the problem(s). Sue Nathan explained that the low-income individuals will get up to 16 hours of
service, including an air infiltration test. A 2596 improvement in infiltration rates will translate into
a 796 direct energy savings.
John McKay asked about the number of low-income individuals we have in Apple Valley.
Swaim explained the program numbers which were recorded during the first year of the
energy program Swaim explained that of 230 households requesting landscape audits, 108 planted
trees. She also explained the. promotional efforts and areas she felt we could concentrate on in year
two of the program.
Sue Nathan explained issues which she observed that she thought we could improve on during
the second year. The improvement centered around simplification of the process for those who want
a $10.00 audit. Nathan also stated that emphasis on completion of request cards is important -cards
lacking vital information pose difficulties for those who are responding to that request. Nathan also
explained how those with new homes may have specific concerns which can be addressed by an
auditor, but generally the new homes were built to standards which incorporated energy efficient
requirements.
Van Holston stated that he had the landscape energy audit and that it was very informative.
Peggy stated that 130. people have had home energy checkups.
Bob Erickson asked about the 1978-79 energy credit programs. Sue Nathan responded.
Shirley Doering asked about the fuel assist applicants. Sue Nathan explained that both Self
Reliance Center and Minnegasco work with and refer qualified clients to fuel assistance programs.
Urban Affairs Advisory Committee Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 3
Councilman Erickson stated he would put this on a Council agenda to reemphasize the fact
that this program is not designed to sell products.
B. Housing Preservation Program
-Scott Hickok-
Scott Hickok explained briefly the history of the housing preservation efforts in Apple Valley
and what ordinances may be appropriate for future adoption. Hickok discussed articles which had
been clipped from recent newspapers to emphasize the importance of early implementation of
preservation awareness programs and standards.
Bob Erickson explained this is not a new concept, not only can a program such as this educate,
but it can set standards to utilize if paint, shutters, etc. are falling. off homes.
Shirley Doering asked about the inspection process. Hickok explained that it depends on the
policies which we set for implementing this program.
John McKay cautioned against mass discipline and also asked what specifically we would look
for. Examples of working plumbing, insufficient electrical service were given.
A general housing preservation discussion ensued.
5. OTHER STUDY OR CODE ISSUES
A general discussion on attendance occurred following the housing preservation issue.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at g:55 p.m.
kg