HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/14/1994UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Port Angeles, Washington
February 14, 1994
Call to Order:
Councilman Braun called the meeting to order at 4:37 p.m.
II.
Roll Call:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Gary Braun, Cathleen McKeown, Joe Michalczik, and Bill Myers.
Larry Schueler.
Staff Present: C. Knutson, J. Pomeranz, P. Ostrowski, J. Sargent, L. Doyle, K.
Godbey, C. Hagar, B. Titus, J. Pittis, B. Jones and K. Ridout.
III.
Approval of Minutes:
Joe Michaiczik moved to approve the minutes of the January 10, 1994, meeting as
written. The motion was seconded by Councilmember McKeown and carried
unanimously.
IV. Discussion Items:
Public Works Director Pittis suggested that Item C. be moved up on the agenda as a
matter of courtesy to Mr. Leonard.
Presentation from Larry Leonard Re: Collection of Past Due Utility Bills From
Real Properties
Larry Leonard, 1030 Olympus Street, a realtor in Port Angeles, thanked the Customer
Service Staff for the excellent job they do in taking care of utility bills and attempting to
make it fair.
Mr. Leonard felt that tenants should be held solely responsible for their utility bills, and
that it is punitive to hold landlords liable for a tenant's delinquent account. He has
conducted a survey of several cities and found that many cities require large deposits of
tenants if they lien the property owner. This greatly reduces the landlords liability. He
felt the City should not have to resort to lien rights, as there are other means available
for making the tenant pay.
Utility Advisory Committee
February 14, 1994
City Attorney Knutson explained to the Committee that the City cannot give up one way
of collecting on delinquent accounts without first having in place another manner of
collecting, i.e. deposits. Currently the City requires a deposit of $160.00 for single
family residences. This amount was established in 1984. Mr. Leonard suggested that
the City update this amount to reflect today's cost for utility services.
Mr. Leonard then introduced Carroll Lunsford from Lunsford & Associates and Sandra
Wimpold, of Landmark Property Management. Carroll Lunsford, Lunsford &
Associates, also felt the Customer Service staff has been friendly and cooperative. He
echoed Mr. Leonard's concern of undue burden on property owners.
Sandra Wimpold, Landmark Property Management, stated that winter was an especially
hard time, and many tenants let their utility bills go unpaid. Landlords don't know the
bills are delinquent until the tenant moves out. She felt that the City should notify
landlords when a delinquent bill exceeds the deposit amount. She further stated that the
PUD does not exercise lien right, but pursues the tenant for delinquent accounts.
Mr. Leonard returned to the podium to suggest that if the system the City utilizes cannot
be changed, then perhaps when LIDs are checked for the title companies, past due utility
bills could be checked at the same time.
Tony Kapetan, address not given, spoke on behalf of rate payers. He agreed with Ms.
Wimpold that landlords should be notified when delinquent utility bills exceed deposits.
However, he did not feel that the tenant should be held solely responsible for delinquent
utility bills. It is far too easy for a delinquent tenant to leave the City and never pay the
bills. Accounts that are written off become a financial burden to all rate payers. Mr.
Kapetan felt that holding the landlord responsible was the only fair way to deal with this
issue.
Attorney Knutson pointed out that the information provided in the packets as
informational Item B addresses this problem. He then reviewed the information regarding
Senate Bill 5016, which would negate the City's lien right under certain circumstances.
The Finance Department will keep the UAC updated on Senate Bill 5016, and this issue
will be revisited when 5016 has been decided. Mr. l~,,,onard requested that he be updated
on this issue also.
B. Presentation from Pararnetrix on the Solid Waste Disposal Feasibility Study
Public Works Director Pittis distributed copies of a chart showing Solid Waste
Management Analysis, and briefings on the Solid Waste Disposal Feasibility Study. He
then gave an explanation of the chart, and a status report on the landfill. He introduced
Mr. Richard Dunlap of Parametrix, who gave a presentation on the Feasibility Study.
Utility Advisory Committee
February 14, 1994
Mr. Dunlap explained that the evaluation done by Parametrix made key assumptions: 1)
that Parametrix would accept ail the data developed by the 1992 Comprehensive Plan with
regard to the wastestream; 2) Parametrix would consider the analysis of alternatives that
would give Port Angeles an equivalent disposai system; 3) recycling would be considered
at two different levels; 4) there would be no change in the current collection/transport
system; and 5) implementation would take place by the end of 1998.
Mr. Dunlap described and evaluated the alternatives to the current landfill, citing
!echnical considerations, economic comparisons, environmental consequences, institutional
issues and giving a final ranking of the disposal alternatives.
The final analysis showed waste export to be the most economically, and environmentally
feasible alternative to the current landfill. Discussion followed, with concern being
expressed over the City having to haul its garbage to other areas. Mr. Dunlap explained
that the areas that have developed these facilities for accepting refuse are in much drier
areas; therefore, their capacity far exceeds that of wet areas such as Port Angeles. Many
cities are resorting to this method of waste disposal.
Mr. Dunlap aiso recommended that the City should involve Clallam County, the Cities
of Forks and Sequim as well as the Tribe and Park in the decision-making process.
Interlocal agreements would probably be in order, as the City needs to know that it will
be supported by the other landfill users in whatever decision they made.
C. Discussion of Changes to City Light Extension Policy
City Light Director Titus reviewed the information he had provided regarding revisions
to the Line Extension Policy. A discussion followed, and Director Titus gave a further
explanation as to why these revisions are necessary and fair.
Tim German, 2025 W. 12th Street, explained to the Committee that as the current policy
reads, developers like himself and the people they sell their homes to are being
discriminated against, as they are not eligible for any line extension reimbursements.
Further discussion followed, with Joe Michalczik expressing fear that a developer could
use this policy as a way of making money, which is not the intent of the policy. Director
Titus explained that he did not think this was possible. The City issues refunds to
individuals who have paid towards a line extension as others make use of the already
installed facilities. Presently, developers are not allowed these refunds, nor are the
customers of these developers who purchase the newly built homes. These revisions are
soley to make the existing policy more equitable.
3
Utility Advisory Committee
February 14, 1994
After further discussion, Bill Myers moved that the Committee support the revisions
to the Line Extension Policy for recommendation to the City Council.
Councilmember McKeown seconded the motion, which passed by a majority vote,
with Joe Michalczik abstaining, as he was concerned over the long term effects of
these revisions.
Vo
Next Meeting:
The next meeting of the Utility Advisory Committee will be held on Monday, March 7,
1994, at 4:30 p.m.
VI. Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
Chairn~m ~
City Clerk
4