HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-06-17 Sewer Committee MinutesSEWER COMMITTEE
MEETING MWUMS
WEDNESDAY, RINE 17
4:00 PM
Councilors Attending: Mchi Frighten, Sohn Rohmam Tim Woodcock
Staff Attending: Edward Barren, Tun Ring, Brad Moore, John Murphy
Others Attending: David Hughes
Meeting convened at 4:00 per
1. Citizen David Hughes -Material Attach
Brad explained that Mr. Hughes requested an showman on a large sewer bill as a result of plumbing
problems atI I Lincoln Saxes, Bamgor. The request come an after the 120 day limit which is outlived
in the ordioauce. This is the limit N which someone can request an abatement after the bill date.
Brad responded to Mr. Hughes that it would not qualify for an abatement because of the time lintit.
Subsequently, Mr. Hughes requested that he be allowed to speak to the Committee as there are
extenuating dncumstances. Nichi commented that she understood that the abatement can be back
120 days tied the request also has to he made 120 days from the previous bell date. Ed explawed that
N be considered, requests for abatement must be made within 120 days of the billing date of the bill
in question Mr. Hughes explained Nat once the situation was recognized, he did take care of the
problem immediately. Theextawnting circumsmnces were due to a sraffperson who did nes file the
slamming request. Mr. Hughes did mm sce the January bill. He recognized the problem in May and
as soon as he saw it, he put in the request to Brad. Since the problem has been fixed, the usage has
gone back an normal. Councilor Romano asked what has happened N the past with those that have
had extenuating circumstances beyond IM days. Ed explained then there has neva been an
abatevuent insured N that instance. It would take action by the Council. Ed's suggestion is that if
that is done, the ordinance needs to be looked at arta changed. Councilor Woodcock asked what
exactly is me language in the ordinance. Ed responded 'due care shall be defined as the normal and
reasonable steps which would be taken by a pendent individual to operating and maintaining their
water and sewer systema' Brad emnaggrted that he has worked with Mr. Hughes before regarding
other properties that he is responsible for and this is the fast time they've dealt with this type of
situation. Councilor Woodcock commented that this is clearly a question ofwhere the burden falls.
The Commince will hook at roogradedvg the language of the ordinance. No motion was taken with
regard to Wer abatement.
2. F11 un - City Limits"Rmentaurant Abatement
Brad explained Net this was a result of a request at the Inst meeting concerning whether the City was
in the right is granting the abatement at 128 units for City Limits Restaurant. Code EMorcemem
gave Brad some fins of restaurants in town that have similar sire based on seating capacity. This
ud'ormation was provided as an update to the Consortium and Brad stated that they wort! keep an
rye an the next 2 to 3 quarters on the consumption for the City Limits to make we 4 is stilt noming
about the same.
3. Discussion -High Strength Wast
Jim Fling explained that a few meetings ago, Councilor Tyler mentioned this issue and felt that it
should be revisited. By way of explanation, Jim told the Committee that the City's ordinance has
provisions whereby if someone contributes waste that is higher than normal strength in terms of
pollutants that the City may pro -rate that to more fully recover the costs. There are two businesses
imtovmthmmegisitesignifmantintldsrmpect. Jimfeels that the issues aresthat potentially the qty
could recover more revenue and theoretically the equity issue is more fairly treated because it's use
orpaytypesimaaon The down side is what impact does this have on individual businesses. When
this was discussed before, there was a suggestion to implement a phase period a surcharge which
could be easily calculated to enceruaim people to take other action such as on-site pre-treatment, etc.
Staff has also worked with iberepresenafives from both of the businesses. One of the businesses has
looked at what would beiavolved in pre-minnag then waste so thin they wouldn't be considered high
strength and then consultant indicated to them that it would be less expensive to pay the surcharge.
The other business, a milk processing facility, was looking at a very large amount of money,
approximately $90,000 per year far the snuharge. There is a general provision in the commons; but
hwouldbeapoficydedkwwhethmornottoblendtheafuem. Staffhad hoped the dlscussionof
this issue would lead to the individual businesses taking steps to try to reduce then elluent Bow, but
to Jim's knowledge, throe has not beer a lot of progress. Councilor Rebound asked if there is a
precedent in other districts and treatment plants. Brad captained that ym, there is. The City of
Portland surcharges Oakhurst Dairy in thew district and that they are required to do some pre-
treatment before it discharges ado the sewer. There is site a surcharge on Unifirst, a commercial
Gundry. The precedents have been set within me nate. The way the ordinance is written, it gives the
City the ability to surcharge. Jim commented that currently all the other rate -payers; are sharing W
that con and each one individually probably doesn't amount to much money, however, Were is the
issueofequhy. ThisirdomuGonwasgiv mbackgrmn forthe Con nee.Itwassuggestedthat
staff revisor His issue and come back to the Committee with more information. No motion is needed.
�IMPMts-PPrrmnrac.�
Twupdatedthe Committee on correspondence from the CSO Partnership. Theyareasking
for more money than the normal annual connbution if the community is able to. John
Murphy explained that the legislation being proposed "a CSO ParmusWp will make the
CSO policy pmt of the clean water act This will force the EPA to pay closer attention to
their share of the responsibilities, and, in addition, it will provide some gran funds which are
very important for that City's CSO program. The board of directors of the Partnership
recently dinnassed ways of raising money to help make this legislation happen end came up
with a $3500 assessment against each community. John objected to that for small
communities and recommended that perhaps for the smaller communities it be a voluntary
contribution rather Nam a mandatory contribution. Staff is asking for direction on this issue
as to whctha or runt the City should consider the additional assessment and if so, how mubh.
The City's aninddue; are $500, which is put into the budget Councilor Woodwck asked
John if the money thin is being assessed would be un additional annual payment. John
explained that this would be a one-time payment This is speciScally for the CSO bill that is
being prepared in congress. Councilor Woodcock asked when the total amount is that needs
to be miaed't John answerd that it is approximately $70,000. There are 70 communities out
ofapossible 1100 CSO communities. The idextism get $3500 from Ne 70 wmmuvities and
Nen request other CSO communities to make a contribution because they will benefit Gum
the bill. John feels that most of the communities will take this under consideration and will
make an ahemate covtributiov. Councilor Woodcock asked what the $70,000 will pay for.
John explained Nat it would go into the legal representation and preparing the bill for
congress, mostly legal fees. Councilor Woodcock commented Nat this is a major piece of
legislation and that this partnership will look out after the City's interest and did it is m the
City's best interest N sun that they are funded sufaemly Councilor Woodcockaskdifthis
would befimded an ofthe general Rated? John explained that this would probably wine from
a sewer accomn, it will have to be looked at. John explained that Nae is a July 31 request
data to have this done. Staff will pm together more information and will bring this back to
Ne Committee.
,myamwmar�.rc.ane