Loading...
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