North Koochiching district hears plan to qualify for MPCA funding, considers low‑interest PFA loan

At its July 23 meeting, the North Koochiching Area Sanitary District heard a presentation from consultant Jason and Diane Matthews of FCA explaining a facility plan the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requires for the district to qualify for Clean Water revolving funds and PFA low‑interest loans to finance sewer rehabilitation work.

“This proposal will give us that facility plan that the MPCA requires,” Diane Matthews said, describing a submittal that includes cost‑effectiveness documentation, alternatives analysis and a memorandum summarizing existing CCTV videos. She told the board the plan is written to cover both an immediate Phase 1 priority project and later phases so the same plan can be used if the district pursues additional work.

Board members asked how much the facility plan and related upfront tasks would cost and whether those costs can be rolled into a loan. Jason said consultants’ and engineering costs can typically be included in a PFA loan and reimbursed at closing. “Those are still typically 20‑year, roughly 2% loans,” he said, describing the low interest and modest administrative fees associated with PFA financing.

Kelly asked whether an earlier quoted televising cost (about $63,900 for heavy cleaning and televising) is included in the larger construction estimates and whether the facility‑plan fee of about $26,000 would cover all tasks. Consultants said the $26,000 covers preparation of the facility plan but not all downstream design and construction costs; they offered to provide a budget breakdown (construction vs. non‑construction/engineering) once design scopes are defined.

Consultants also warned that some of the district’s existing CCTV videos date to 2018 and recommended re‑televising those portions before finalizing bid documents so bidders have recent footage. That additional televising would be an added cost the board could elect to do this fall or defer until closer to construction, the presenters said.

On timing, the consultants said they can begin the facility plan in August or delay to September and still meet a projected completion in February, but MPCA application deadlines and the agency’s intended‑use plan require annual choices about whether to remain on the priority list. The board asked the finance and budget committee to meet and return a recommendation on whether to pursue a single‑phase approach (do it all at once) or phase the work to spread costs over time. A board member also noted that meeting two committees together could create a quorum and suggested calling a special meeting if the committees meet jointly.

Next steps: the board tasked the finance and budget committee with reviewing phase options and cost estimates and asked consultants to provide a clearer cost breakdown for engineering, construction and reimbursable items. Consultants offered to attend interim committee meetings by Zoom to clarify details before the board decides whether to authorize the facility plan work to start in August or September.