Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/93TAPE #1142 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 20, 1993 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, October 20, 1993, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Eileen Fitz presiding. Council members present were Richard Neville, Lynn Horton, Hank Waibel, C.R. "Tiny" Collins, Morrie Dawkins, Russ Johnson, Lon Overson, and Al Colvin. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Acting City Clerk Rich Hanna. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Fitz and Invocation given by Rod Jones of Emmanuel Apostolic Church. president Fitz announced Council has canceled the Study Session scheduled for November 1 due to the Budget Review process that will take up most of the month of November. Council will be setting a Study Session prior to the budgeting in regard to the Utilities and finances of the Utilities. CON8ENT AGENUA A. Minutes of Meeting -- October 6, 1993 #AB93-200 #0040 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Dawkins) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/WARRANT REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0060 M/S/C/U(Colvin/Horton) October 20, 1993, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 170276, 170277, 170296 through 170447 in the total amount of $191,543.36; and Regular Payroll for the period ending October 15, 1993, in the amount of $545,735.39 COUNCIL MEMBER REPORT8 Mr. Colvin announced District # 1 Coalition Meeting is scheduled for October 28, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park Recreation Center. The purpose of the meeting is to explore both sides of the question concerning changing the form of City government. He emphasized all citizens are invited to attend that meeting. Mr. Waibel wished his wife a very "Happy Anniversary" this TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 2 of 39 coming Sunday. And, he wished his daughter Holly, who will be a teenager on October 21, a Happy Birthday PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mayor Louis Mentor announced the Parks Department is sponsoring a "Splash And Jam" at the Municipal Pool and YMCA on Saturday, October 23, 7:00 - 10:00 P.M., for 6th through 9th graders. On November 6, 9:00 - 4:00 P.M., a flea- market/craft sale will take place at the Sheridan Park Recreation Center in support of the Pendergast Regional Park fund. Gordy Byrd, P.O.Box 930, reported the Crossroads Church recent fund raising event benefitted the A.L.I.V.E Shelter, Bremerton Foodline and the Byrds Nest. He was pleased to report the Byrds Nest's portion was $5-600.00. He publicly thanked Tammy, who worked on the fund raising event, and presented her with an appreciation plaque for her support and encouragement to Byrds Nest. As of this date he has collected $15,322.56 for his shelter for the homeless. Don Larson, 135 Rainier Avenue, reported he received a letter from the Radison Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel in California, stating they are working with Kids For Saving The Earth International, and they selected his group as one of ten finalist for an award for kids ages 9-14. A youth has been selected from Mr. Larson's group, who had assisted in the Sinclair Inlet clean ups. For being a finalist in this award designation, the youth will receive a "star" similar to the Hollywood Star and they are required to write a 250-word essay on "What Can I Give To Earth This Holiday Season As A Defender Of The Planet". The winner of that award will receive an all expense paid trip, including their parents, to Hollywood, California. He emphasized there are some rewards for cleaning our beaches. Glenn Jarstad, 2823 Hefner Avenue, publicly thanked the County and City Paramedics and the airlift services to Harborview Hospital. Two of his close friends were involved in a motorcycle accident and not expected to live. With the assistance of the paramedics and the helicopter airlift service to Harborview Trauma Center, they both have totally recovered from their injuries. On Tuesday, October 19, another incident happened involving a young girl being injured on Sheridan Road and having to be airlifted to Harborview. He suggested that all of the elected officials from the various governmental entities in Kitsap County send letters of accommodations to the Harborview Trauma team. President Fitz stated in recent weeks she also knows of several children who TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 3 of 39 had terrible head injuries from accidents and they too have recovered due to the great and quick assistance by the airlift helicopters and the trauma team at Harborview. She supported Mr. Jarstad's suggestion of writing letter of thanks for the help that the citizens of Kitsap County receives from their services. Robert A. Ackerman, 37 Arsenal Way, thanked the City Street Department for repairing potholes on Arsenal Way. He was gravely concerned about building contractors being allowed to burn natural vegetation openly without any restriction when people with wood burning stoves or fireplaces are restricted. He suffers from emphysema and was hospitalized due to "open burning" in his neighborhood. He felt very strongly that contractors should be required to haul their debris away and dispose of it in the landfill rather than burning it on site. 6A - PUGET POWER LINE EASEMENT -- ANDERSON HILL ROAD, #AB93- 201 Puget Power has an existing easement and transmission line on City property adjacent to Anderson Hill Road. They are requesting an additional ten (10) feet of width over a length of 3,960 feet to accommodate adding crossarms to the existing poles. The additional area required will be 0.9 acres. Compensation to the City for the additional area will be $700. Merchantable timber requiring removal will be felled by Puget Power and left for marketing by the City's forestry staff. Bill McKinney, Forestry Manager, Public Works Utility, stated the only revision to what was included in the Agenda Bill was the fact that an agreement had been reached between the City and Puget Power that they would be responsible for falling, removal and marketing the merchantable timber and the City would then be compensated for the value of the timber. In this way, the City is removed from the liability of having to obtain Forest Practice Permits and County road access permits. Mr. Overson questioned the whereabouts of Eddy Chu, Public Works and Utilities Director? Mr. McKinney stated he did not know the whereabouts of Mr. Chu at this time. Mr. Overson questioned the location of the Anderson Hill property? Mr. McKinney explained the area is located between Gorst and Port Orchard. The utility owns approximately 450 acres west of Anderson Hill Road and this site would be the immediate eastern boundary of the Utility property. Mr. Overson stated he asked for that location description so that no one confused it with the other Anderson Hill Road in the County. He questioned for clarification that the easement will not impact TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 4 of 39 the watershed application for that area? Mr. McKinney assured him there would be no adverse impact to the watershed. Public comment - none Mr. Dawkins stated the Operations Committee reviewed this item and found it to be necessary, and at no cost to the City. #0479 M/S/C/U(Dawkins/Colvin) to approve the attached Easement agreement between the City and Puget Power for the Mayor's signature. 7A - ORDINANCE NO. 4434 (SECOND READING) ADOPTING RCW 4.66.44.270, PROHIBITING CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL BY MINORS, #AB93-198 Public comment - none. #0507 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Overson) to pass Ordinance #4434, on second reading, adopting RCW 66.44,270 relating to minors consuming alcohol and amending Section 9A.12.010 and repealing Section 9A.12.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 7B - ORDINANCE NO. 4435 (SECOND READING) AMENDING BMC 9A.24.220 REGARDING DANGEROUS WEAPONS, #AB93-199 Robert Ackerman, 3706 Arsenal Way, stated when he received is permit he was informed that the only place he could carry his weapon was to and from a firing range. Until the discussion on this item, he was not aware that he could carry his firearm into the Council Chambers. He questioned why didn't Council prohibit firearms and dangerous weapons in any within the City Hall building instead of just restricting it to court related facilities? Gordy Byrd, P.O. Box 930, asked that he receive a copy of this ordinance so that he could understand where dangerous weapons and firearms were prohibited. Mrs. Horton stated the discussion at the previous Council meeting centered on the fact that Council would like to expand this ordinance, but unfortunately the State Legislature has put limitations on what Council can pass locally. Therefore, Council is simply passing, based on the City Attorney's advise, what the State Legislature has told us we can pass. Effort will also be made to relate the City Council's position on this particular issue to the Legislators in the hope that some changes can be made. #0666 M/S/C/U(Horton, Colvin) to pass Ordinance #4435, on second reading, amending the prohibition of firearms in certain TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 5 of 39 places, to include other dangerous weapons and prohibitions of weapons in school facilities and in all areas connected with court proceedings and amending Section 9A.24.220 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 7C - RESOLUTION NO. 2445, SUPPORT FOR THE WATERFRONT/CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION STUDY AND MASTER PLAN, #AB93- 202 At its October 4, 1993 Study Session, the City Council was provided an information briefing by Community Development Staff, the Project Team, and supporters for the Waterfront/ Central Business District Revitalization Implementation Strategy and Master Plan for development. The City Council was presented with a Resolution of support for the Revitalization Strategy and Master Plan. Individual letters of support and resolutions of support from project team agencies were also presented. The group requested that the City Council consider action on a similar Resolution of support for the project. Carol Dickinson, Development Manager, stated this Resolution was prepared following two study session reviews by the City Council and at Council's specific request. Also, on October 4, Council asked staff to make sure they provided an informational briefing to the Planning Commission. The briefing of the Planning Commission took place on October 19 and the following Resolution was adopted: "Be it resolved that the Bremerton Planning Commission, after considering oral and written testimony and staff report, hereby resolves that we, as the Planning Commission and representatives of the Planning Commission, offer support to Carol Dickinson and her organization in development and planning for the Bremerton waterfront and encourage them in every possible way. The Bremerton Planning Commission further resolves to offer continued support in any way possible so that planning and development and interaction with outside agencies can continue so as to help make this project a reality for the City of Bremerton". #0755 Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Neville/Overson) to adopt Resolution No. 2445 in support of the Waterfront/Central Business District (CBD) Revitalization Implementation Strategy and Master Plan. Mr. Waibel pointed out the lack of discussion on this issue may be construed by some people that there is lack of interest. Council is very interested in this project and the adopted resolution speaks to that interest. Much work has TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 6 of 39 taken place on this issue over the past 14-15 months and Council has been supplied information during that process. 7D - RESOLUTION NO. 2446, AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FROM EOUIPMENT RENTAL FUND TO WASTEWATER OPERATING FUND, #AB93-203 An interfund loan will be necessary to finance the settlement agreement of the Wastewater Operating Fund until external financing can be arranged. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, pointed out the need to have two separate motions, the first to approve the Resolution and second would approve the accompanying Budget Adjust Request, which reflects implementation of the Resolution. Mrs. Horton questioned the residual balance in the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund if this proposal is approved? Mr. Hanna stated approximately $350,000. Mrs. Horton questioned what kind of purchases will the City be making in 1994 out of that fund? Mr. Hanna stated the order of magnitude for all of 1994 will be approximately $200,000. Mr. Overson passed on a quote from a constituent: "what kind of miss management is going on in that city that would have us having to borrow from the little General Fund to support the Utility"? Mr. Overson did not have an answer and felt the proposal being presented was inappropriate. He emphasized a Utility operates on a rate base, there is a budget and you establish a rate to support that budget. In his opinion, there should not be an exchange of funds between the two funds and questioned its legality. He felt strongly that it was inappropriate for Council to support such a request. He noted Council needs to address the problems of the Utility within the Utility and if there is need to borrow funds from the Utility to run it, then lets borrow funds in the Utility appropriately funded. President Fitz requested the City Attorney to inform Council if the proposal is appropriate and legal? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated Council had participated in loans between its enterprise funds in the past. As long as the accounting is kept very clear so that there is a trail and reimbursements are made for the use of those funds, loans can be made between funds. Mr. Overson stated he was not aware of a single loan from the General Fund to the Utility? Mr. Hanna stated by definition an interfund loan takes places between two different funds. He could recall several instances in which the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund has been used to make temporary interfund loans to other operating funds. He did not recall that any of those borrowing funds in the past has been among the City's Utilities. Late last year a similar interfund loan was made TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 7 of 39 when the City's long term financial planning "hit a snag" in October with the 1992 Bond issue and it was necessary at that time to make a similar short term interfund loan until the Bond Market could be accessed for long term financing. As the text of the resolution indicates, that is exactly the case in this instances...a short term solution until the City can put in place the long term capital acquisition by going to the Bond Market and seeking permanent financing. Mr. Overson stated he did not accept that light hearted attitude. The Utility fund is rate based and the rate should support the Utility's requirements and should include a contingency that costs $30+ million dollars a year to operate the Utility. He felt it was rather sad that we don't even have a one million dollar contingency. Mr. Colvin stated he felt Council should hold a Study Session on the Utility's financial status. Mr. Waibel stated as mentioned, Council will hold a Study Session on the Utilities and he encouraged Council to remember action taken at this time during that review; and he hoped the rate payors are aware that in order to have a million dollar reserve rates will have to increase to cover that reserve. Council has not approved increases in the past, and this may be a reminder that maybe we should have and should in the future. The City had a court action, which it agreed to and now must respond in a timely fashion. Mr. Colvin questioned if it was mandatory to make a decision on this item at this time? Mr. Hanna stated when the City signed the settlement agreement with the Westhills Association, they committed to a payment on November 1 and there is not presently unrestricted cash available in the Wastewater Fund to make that payment without an interfund loan. Roy McInnis, 2711 Maple Street, stated he understands the problem the City is in, however, he was lost as far as the amount of income into the Wastewater Utility system. During the time Council passed the settlement agreement, he did not recall any discussion that funds would have to be found from some other source other than the Utility. Some years ago, when the plant was built, there was a great huge increase in the collecting for the plant itself and over the years there should have been some kind of decrease in cost to the residents of the City. In his mind, there is something confusing about the funds in the Wastewater Utility and he too agreed with Mr. Overson that the administration was continually dipping into the Equipment Rental Fund and passing TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 8 of 39 it along. He was also concerned that he had not heard any discussion about repayment schedule of the proposed interfund loan. What he was hearing was that the City may be looking towards heading into a rate increase in order to make up for this difference. President Fitz stated the money being approved within this proposal is to go toward the first payment in settlement of the Westhills Association lawsuit and was not something that was probably considered happening some time ago. This action is an interim action until the City goes out for bonds. She questioned the timing of obtaining the necessary bonds? Mr. Hanna stated he expected that will happen in the first quarter of 1994. President Fitz explained when the bonds are obtained the money will be paid back to the Equipment Rental Fund. She believed the City had stated all along that the settlement of the lawsuit would cost money and that rates would have to go up. She felt it was unfortunate that probably rates should have been going up in a small amount over a longer period of time, but that did not happen and the City must look forward from this point. A rate study is in the process of being completed and Council will be holding Study Sessions on that issue. She did not believe that anyone on the Council said anything different than the settlement of the lawsuit would cost the City money and that there would be rate hikes. Mr. Waibel pointed out the original construction loan is not the only loan the City has had to take out, other capital loans were necessaryto try and improve the situation at the wastewater treatment plant. While interest on the original loan may have gone down, there were other capital loans added to that cost, which would not allow the City to reduce rates. He agreed with President Fitz that the City should have been adding funds all along and maybe the City would have had a million dollar reserve, however, that was not done. He emphasized sewer rates will be increasing, both for payment of the settlement of the lawsuit and for additional construction necessary at the site resulting from the lawsuit. Glenn Jarstad, 2823 Hefner, stated he did not believe there was anything else to do than what was being proposed in the interfund loan. He read about the doom of everything the people in Navy Yard City complained about and blaming the City for the loss in property values. He questioned if that was so, why did the County increased his land holdings of 14 lots that are closer to the sewer plant than most people? Robert Ackerman, 3706 Arsenal Way, stated he understood the settlement of the lawsuit, it making a big hole in the City, and sewer rates will probably go up to pay for the lawsuit. Recently, he drove by the sewer treatment plant and still TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 9 of 39 found the plant was emitting a strong odor and questioned if there would be another lawsuit over this same issue or was the City going to correct the problem? He did not think the City had done much to eliminate the offensive smell at the treatment plant. He doubted he would ever consider purchasing a home in the area impacted by the sewer plant smell. President Fitz explained the City is committed to doing everything possible to fix the smell at the sewer plant. Mr. Johnson stated interfund loans are lousy business and they should always be avoided. It doesn't take long to end up with a ruined cash flow and budgets that don't reflect the actual funding situation of the City. However, in this case the City has approximately one week to come up with one million dollars, in cash, to make a payment on the Westhills Association settlement. He doubted the City could go out at this point to a bank and make such a transaction. He felt Mr. Overson was right on target in that Council needs to grab hold of the funding situation in the Utility, putting in some direction and long range strategy. The smallest problem the City has to deal with is the Westhills Association suit. The consent order and the agreement the City signed with Department Of Ecology (DOE), on the Warren Avenue Basin and the other major construction projects are much larger going over a 10 year period. Yes, he believes there will be a big rate increase in 1994. At this time no one knows how large a rate increase will come about, but the construction the City is committed to up to the year 2015 far exceeds the cost to the sewer plant that has been built to date. There is one good thing about this proposal and that has to do with the low interest rates that are available at this time, however, the bad news is that there is no grant money available. #1386 M/S/C/(Johnson/Collins) motion to approve Resolution No. 2446 authorizing an interfund loan from the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund to the Wastewater Operating Fund. Vote on Motion: In Favor: Neville, Horton, Waibel, Fitz, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson Opposed: Overson Motion carried. #1419 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Neville) to approve Budget Adjustment #93-24. #1443 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Waibel) that the City Treasurer and Director Of Utilities be directed to provide a full recommended financial plan and strategy for the City of Bremerton Utilities water, wastewater, stormwater, etc., through the year 2000 no later than November 1 and that the City Council TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 10 of 39 address that with those staff members either during the budget review session or a special session depending on the information submitted. Mrs. Horton stated she would like Mr. Chu to present the information requested in the motion stated above. 7E - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) LEVYING PROPERTY TAXES FOR COLLECTION IN 1994, #AB93-204 State law requires that the City levy property taxes through passage of an ordinance. Figures in the attached ordinance are based on the preliminary assessment roll. They will be adjusted upon acceptance of the final assessment roll by the County. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated this is an annual event. He was pleased to report the City's levy rates will decline from the current to what is proposed in the ordinance. The City's current M&O levy is at $3.09 per thousand. Because of the growth in the assessed valuation this year, that levy rate will decline to $3.02 per thousand in 1994. The Law Enforcement Levy, which was approved by the voters, was a one year excess property tax levy and will not be relevied in 1994. Mr. Johnson stated he would think the size of the rate is more of a function of the value of the property than it is the amount of money that you're spending. Mr. Waibel stated he will not be able to do this next year so he'll do it again this year... he asked to make sure that Council's Agenda packet contains what the assessed valuation was in the previous year so it can be compared. Mr. Hanna apologized for the fact that particular information was not included in Council's packet. The current assessed valuation is $1,072,545,656.00, so there is an approximately eight percent increase in the City's assessed valuation. Mr. Waibel questioned for clarification that means the City is getting a full six percent increase? Mr. Hanna stated yes. Floyd Kern, 320 White Pine Drive, stated his property taxes raised $657.00 in one year. If he had been paying that amount for the past 20 years, since he moved to his residence, his taxes would be close to $13-14,000 per year. He felt it was ridiculous to raise the taxes of lots of the people who live in Bremerton. He emphasized he did not support the City's construction of the boardwalk and he felt a lot of people do not support the 4th Street construction project, however, the City undertook both projects. He also believes a lot of TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 11 of 39 people did not want Roosevelt Field given away to the College and traded for the parking lot now located on the old Bremerton Lumber site. He stated there are lots of things done in the City he doesn't like. Willis Stouffer, 732 So. Summit, questioned why was the City approving an ordinance to raise taxes since that is the County's responsibility? Mr. Hanna stated Mr. Stouffer was correct, the County is the entity that actually levies the property taxes on the City's behalf, however, it is necessary for the City to pass an ordinance that is the mechanism by which the City asks the County Commissioners to levy the taxes. Mr. Stouffer stated last year the County increased the valuation on his property by 24-25%. He challenged that valuation and the Board Of Equalization rolled the valuation back to where it was. He did not request that the valuation be rolled back to that amount and he recalled at that time he only made the statement that no one could complain about a reasonable increase. Two months later, the County Assessor raised his valuation 44%, which he now has to challenge. Robert Ackerman, 3706 Arsenal Way, questioned what was the City doing...trying to throw a bunch of old people out of their homes by raising taxes. It concerned him that there is less and less business downtown. President Fitz explained valuation of property is made by the County and not something the City does. In 1994 the City's O&M levy will be going down seven cents per thousand. Mr. Johnson pointed out this is a 106% lid, business and taxes are not going down even though it sounds like they are. Mr. Overson stated this is a 3.4998% if you look at your tax assessment it is on the order of almost $15.00 with the City of Bremerton getting 3.5%, however, the County and State get almost $10-11.00. He suggested the public go voice their displeasure to the County Commissioners as well. Mr. Collins pointed out $8.00 of that total assessment is given to schools. Mr. Waibel pointed out the City will be collecting approximately 6% more in property tax revenue this year than last year, which is needed to keep up with the cost of living. The way part of that will be paid for is by more people being into the City and by the things that they have being worth a little more. #1884 M/S/C(Waibel/Johnson) to approve Ordinance, on first reading, levying property taxes for 1994. Vote on motion: In Favor: Overson, Neville, Waibel, Fitz, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 12 of 39 Opposed: Horton Motion carried. 8A - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2447, REGARDING THE RECOVERY OF FEES FOR SECURING THE PROPERTY AGAINST VAGRANTS AND VANDALS AT 5962 HARLOW DRIVE, #AB93-205 In June of 1993, the City was forced to secure the building located at 5962 Harlow Drive, owned by Stephen Jacobson, and which is under abatement by the Building Department as an unsafe structure. The building is heavily fire-damaged, and has become an attractive nuisance to minors. The Street Department performed the work and the abatement fund was charged $540.14. David Nelson, Building Official, stated the City is still in the abatement process on this property. Due to identifiable problems, he felt it was necessary to protect the public further, at the added cost, while the abatement process continued. Mrs. Horton questioned how close is the City to having the outstanding abatements come due and are any of them paying off at this time? Mr. Nelson stated none are paying off at this time and it will be some time before any come close to pay off. He did find out that under the provision of the Code that the City adopted for the abatement of dangerous buildings if a lien is filed as a tax assessment, it is subject to the same laws and requirements of any tax assessment lien, which requires that there is a three year waiting period before foreclosure actions can be taken against that lien. There is only one lien, which was filed, that the City has asked for foreclosure, however, it appears that was an incorrect lien and it expired. Mr. Colvin questioned if there was any interest charged on an abatement? Mr. Nelson explained once the lien is put in as a special tax assessment and goes delinquent it collects 7% interest until it is paid off. Mr. Overson raised a question about the appropriate documentation included in this Agenda item and the following Agenda item. Mr. Hanna, Acting City Clerk, explained part of the back up documentation on items 8A and 8B had been switched. Mrs. Horton requested clarification of Mr. Nelson's comment about the lien that expired. Mr. Nelson explained it was an incorrectly filed lien (filed as a Mechanics Material Lien) against a property. The City can go back and refile the lien, TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 13 of 39 however, it would start the three year waiting period at that time. Mrs. Horton questioned if the lien would be refiled? Mr. Nelson stated he has not made that decision yet because the property has changed ownership and the City would be going after the new owner of the site for that purpose. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville questioned if the money collected would go back into the revolving abatement account and would Mr. Nelson pursue other abatements with those funds? Mr. Nelson stated yes to both concerns. Mr. Johnson questioned why did Mr. Nelson wait from June until now to take this action? Mr. Nelson explained his department got involved in doing other processes along with this abatement. This particular house has gone through an asbestos survey and several other things to try and take the house down. Mr. Johnson stated it looked like the work was closed out in June and if the City has to wait three years it now becomes three years and three months. #2166 M/S/C/U(Neville/Dawkins) to pass Resolution No. 2447, ordering that the fees incurred for the securing of 5962 Harlow Drive be filed as a lien against the property as reasonable abatement costs. 8B - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2448, REGARDING THE RECOVERY OF FEES FOR SECURING THE PROPERTY AGAINST VAGRANTS AND VANDALS AT 716 AND 720 S. SUMMIT AVENUE, #AB93-206 In July of 1993, the City was forced to secure the buildings at 716 and 720 S. Summit Avenue, both owned by D. Carroll and C. Holman, which are under abatements by the Building Department as unsafe structures. These buildings are frequented by vagrants and vandals, and often need to be re- secured to prevent entry. The Street Department performed the work and the abatement fund was charged $956.54. David Nelson, Building Official, stated again they had a bad building that they felt needed securing as far as the accessibility to undesirables and children in that area. They did board the house up, however, someone broke into the house and the City had to re-board the building. He emphasized this situation has become a non-response from the owner. Willis Stouffer, 732 Summit Avenue, stated he lives two doors from 720 S. Summit and he did not envy Mr. Nelson his job. In his opinion, the Building Department has done a marvelous job in trying to get something done with this site. These two TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 14 of 39 houses have been a source of trouble in his neighborhood for years. The sites were originally owned by the Silket family, then they were sold to a couple of single people who live in California. He doubted that the current owners had ever seen the properties and was probably using them as a tax right off. About two years ago a murder took place in the facility at 720 Summit. Sunshine Realty acted as property-managers for the properties and proceeded to move people into the two living areas. Mr. Stouffer contacted Don Pratt, Director Of Community Development, and asked that an inspection be made of both 720 and 716 because they were not fit for humans to live in. The City made the inspection and the homes were posted as inhabitable and the owner was given a month to start fixing them up or tearing them down. He supported Mr. Nelson's statement that a lot of vandalism had taken place at both sites, as well as kids gaining entry. He is worried that someone will torch one of the houses, which in turn could adversely affect the elderly lady who lives between the two sites. He did not understand why the City couldn't move a little faster on issues like this. Mrs. Overson questioned in cases where the property owner is not maintaining the properties and it becomes vandalized again and again, is there something that can be done to encourage the property owner to take more permanent action or can the City take more permanent action? Mr. Nelson the City can definitely take more permanent action and he did obtain two estimates of $20,000 each to tear the houses down, which is beyond what is in the Abatement Fund. He has had a total non- response from the owners of these properties. Mr. Colvin questioned how long does the Abatement process take from the beginning to the point of demolishing a property? Mr. Nelson stated it takes from four months to a year. When a building is first posted, the owners are allowed 30 days for take out of permits and 60 days to do the repairs. If the owners do not respond within that time frame, then a Title report has to be obtained and everyone on the Title must be notified that there is pending action on the property and.they are allowed 30 days to appeal that notice. Beyond that point, if there is no response then the City has to decide whether or not to board them up or tear them down, do asbestos surveys, obtain bids, etc. They often times have to respond to appeals of notification when someone has a second lien or interest on the Title. Mrs. Horton asked is there a way we could recoup these monies other than a lien if the person who owns the property is solvent in other respects? Mr. Nelson the Code allows the City the ability to either recoup expended costs by lien or by personal judgement. It is a Council decision #2763 TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 15 of 39 whether or not it is a lien or personal judgement process. It is his recommendation that this proposal be done by lien at this time. Mrs. Horton questioned why? Mr. Nelson stated because it is an intermediate fix or protection for the City until final action is taken or a decision has been made that everything has been done that can be. Gaining the ability to tear the house down with available funding would probably bring out discussion going after the owner with a personal judgemont. Mrs. Horton questioned if that was what Mr. Nelson was working toward? Mr. Nelson stated he is working towards that final resolution of demolition or getting the owner to repair the building. In this instance, it does not look hopeful for repairs. Mr. Waibel questioned how long is the boarding up intended to last and is there some end in sight as to how long the City will wait for the owner to do something? It concerned him that the materials used for boarding up will not last long in the winter weather? Mr. Nelson stated he did not see a fix as far as demolition or repairs are concerned over the next 3-4 months. He assumed he would be looking into 1994 before much is done beyond that. He expected having to go back to the site and replace the boards occasionally as they deteriorate or vandals break in. Mr. Johnson stated the ones on Harlow lasted three weeks. Mrs. Horton questioned what kind of liability did that place the City in if the City puts up materials and then does not take care of them? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, explained the intervention is something the City has volunteered to do in terms of enforcement. If the City had taken no measures to secure the property, we would not be liable. It would be the property owners' liability if vandals were injured or caused a fire. The City does need to be concerned once we enter into trying to protect the public. The City's only concern is that the materials, fencing or whatever is installed through an abatement action, are done properly, are of sound construction and do not create an additional liability that might harm someone. Now that the City has constructed the fence, we do have to maintain the fence and make sure there are no hazards associated with that fence. M/S/C/U(Horton/Neville) to pass Resolution No. 2448, ordering that the fees incurred for the securing of 716 and 720 S. Summit Avenue be filed as a lien against the property as reasonable abatement costs. Mrs. Horton recommended including on Council's Statements Of Legislative Intent for 1994, a Study Session with Mr. Nelson to talk about all the things that we have abated and the TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 16 of 39 process to see if the City could find a more expedient way on getting some of these abatements demolished. 8C - PUBLIC HEARING/ TRANSFER OF BREM-AIR DISPOSAL, INC. CONTRACT TO ENVIROFIL, INC., #AB93-206 Pursuant to Section 8.13 of the contract, Brem-Air Disposal, Inc. is requesting transfer of the contract to Envirofil, Inc. A staff report, along with documentation provided by Envirofil, Inc. has previously been provided to the Mayor and City Council. Sam Humphreys, Senior Vice president and General Counsel of Envirofil, Inc., stated Envirofil is a publicly held corporation, which is headquartered in Houston, Texas, and has entered into an agreement to acquire both Brem-Air Disposal Inc., and Kitsap County Sanitary Landfill, which owns the Olympic View Landfill that serves Kitsap County. The collection contract between Brem-Air Disposal and the City of Bremerton provides that the City has the opportunity to review the perspective transfer of control of Brem-Air in advance of any transfer and has the ability to veto a transfer based on two issues: (1) lack of perceived experience of the management team; or (2) the lack of sufficient financial resources to manage the collection operation serving the City of Bremerton. They, at Envirofil, have provided fairly significant information to Kathleen McCluskey, Director Of Administrative Services, over the past several months regarding these two points and have met on several occasions with her and members of City staff. Envirofil is a publicly held company and in December 1992 it owned two landfills, one in Missouri and one in Illinois and had an unrelated medical equipment business. At that point, it was a fairly sleepy company and the principal shareholders decided to recruit a more experienced management team and one that was focused solely on the solid waste business. Starting in late 1992, those shareholders recruited several new managers and spun out the businesses unrelated to the solid waste industry. Starting at that time the company focused on moving out of simply disposal business and recruiting collection experts and recycling experts. This new management team over the months following December 1992, grew so that it now includes David Southerland-Yoest, who is the President and Chief Executive Officer, David Wassi, President of Browning- Ferris Industries, Ltd.., which was one of BFI's largest subsidiaries prior to joining Envirofil. Before he joined BFI, he was a regional Vice President for Laidlaw and then the Director of Laidlaw's corporate development world-wide. David brought with him Keyin Chernoff, who was the chief Accounting TAPE #1142 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 17 of 39 Officer at BFI Ltd., and Hubert Bourque, who was the Chief Compliance Officer for BFI Ltd.. David brings some fairly substantial management talent to Envirofil and Hubert brings probably as much experience in landfill operations and recycling operations as a handful of people throughout the country. Doug Asay joined shortly thereafter as Vice President of Operations. Lee Wilson recently joined Envirofil as a landfill manager and expert and within the last week they engaged Dan Decorsi who was the Regional Vice President for Laidlaw governing about 1/2 of its U.S. collection and recycling disposal operations. Hubert is a recognized expert in landfill affairs and has been involved in the solid waste business for approximately the last 20 years in different capacities...consulting engineer focusing primarily on disposal facilities, worked throughout Europe, the Middle East, Canada and the United States. He last served as Divisional Vice President of Environmental Affairs for BFI Ltd., Canada, where he was responsible for the environmental compliance of the Canadian landfills/BFI. Hubert is one of the most experienced landfill engineers and has as much recycling experience as anyone on the west coast of the United States. Doug Asay, who will be actively involved in Bremerton, was a Vice President/General Manager for a privately held waste company in Northern California for the last several years. Before that, Mr. Asay served as District Manager in San Jose and prior to that was involved with heavy construction business with the Guy S. Atkinson Company in different parts of the world. Doug also has significant experience on the collection and recycling side of the industry, in fact, he was instrumental in both the San Jose and San Venito recycling operation advising those municipalities on both establishing, operating and bringing those operations into compliance. Doug will be actively involved with the disposal side of the business in Bremerton with the Olympic View Sanitary Landfill and has recently been the manager of a much larger landfill for one of the large solid waste companies and prior to that was a County Landfill manager. Robert Ochiltree will be the controller of the operations in Bremerton and currently serves as the Chief Financial Officer of Environmental Waste Of America, which is also being acquired by Envirofil and, which has collections operations in Skagit County and Stanwood/Camino Island. Mr. Humphreys emphasized their management team brings some fairly significant strengths to any collection or disposal operation. TAPE #1143 What is happening in the solid waste business today is that the legislation and regulations affecting disposal and collection operations are increasing significantly and within the next quarter or two the Federal Subtitle D legislation TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 18 of 38 will be enacted and will radically change the design, monitoring, lining and the general overall compliance structure for solid waste landfills in the United States. That legislation will place increasing pressure on generators of waste, municipalities, commercial operations and those who transport the waste. Envirofil brings a wealth of experience from the regulatory compliance standpoint, facility integrity standpoint and from the general collection experience standpoint. They are excited about coming to Bremerton and working with the City in its collection needs and to help phase in the new more regulated environment, which is being forced upon everyone. Envirofil also bring recycling experience, which they believe is not matched by more than a handful of solid waste companies in the United States at this time. Hubert and David formed the basis of the recycling team at BFI Ltd., which handles volumes far in excess of those that will have to be handled in Bremerton. Doug Asay was not only instrumental in forming the basis for the California recycling plants but devised the plans mostly by himself. They believe as Bremerton moves into a period where the recycling issue is going to affect residents in most cities in the United States in a way it has never has, they can help establish a program which works for you and the community and does in fact lower the waste stream going into the landfill and does it on an economic basis. Envirofil's new management immediately began to attempt to expand the business starting after December 1992. The two landfills that were owned in December 1992, were basically development landfills and had only started taking fairly small amounts of waste. In the first quarter of 1993, they purchased the Sacramento Valley collection operation, which provides residential, commercial and industrial collection and operates buy-back recycling centers. They just closed an acquisition on October 15, in Stockton, California, which is similar to the Sacramento Valley operation and they are adding a recycling operation in Stockton as we speak. On October 19, they received approval from the Amidor County City Council to acquire collection operations in Amidor, California to round out the northern California operations that they acquired beginning in April of 1993. Envirofil has a tentative agreement to purchase four additional collection and recycling companies in New Jersey, serving approximately 89,000 residential customers in different burroughs in that area. There is a state-of-the-art recycling facility in the New Jersey operation and one of the few recycling operators that has developed interesting end use markets and is actually moving some of this product better than most of the independents. They believe that operation will enhance what TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 19 of 38 they have already brought together in the way of recycling talent and facilities. Financial Data: The company they joined, most of them after December 1992, was small and had very limited operations. Since joining that company, in connection with bringing in new management and preparing for these acquisitions, they have raised approximately $40 million dollars in new equity, including the conversion of some debt that was outstanding, approximately $17 million of that coming in a recent equity offering. They have a credit facility with the Bank Of Boston, who are one of the principal lenders to the solid waste industry in the United States. The current facility allows them to borrow approximately $20 million dollars. They have a market capitalization as a public company somewhere in excess of $100 million dollars at this time. Mr. Humphreys believed the City Treasurer had contacted the Bank Of Boston as part of the Director of Administrative Services's research into their background documentation. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated a memo containing his response to the Director Of Administrative Services was included in Council's Agenda packet. Mr. Humphreys stated he and his management staff standby to answer any questions that may come up from either the City Council or the public. Verna Rae Oraker, 623 N. Summit, stated one of her concerns besides being worried that once again rates will be raised, is the management team. She is specifically concerned about the individuals who have worked with Laidlaw, and the reason she is questioning the management team is with experience as a School Board member, she has talked with other School Districts that have had contracts with Laidlaw, got rid of their own school buses and the rates were lowered. However, after a couple of years their transportation rates were increased by Laidlaw to the point where they are far beyond what they were putting out when they had their own buses. This is a story about Laidlaw that has traveled across the nation from other School Districts that have contracted with Laidlaw. If Envirofil's management team are former Laidlaw individuals, then Mr. Humphreys might reassure this community that garbage collections rates are not to be raised or possibly even reduced. She wanted to know what the guarantee was that they would not "screw" this community. Another thing she is tired of hearing is "why can't we have a company from within this state"? She emphasized there are locally owned garbage collection companies in the Seattle area that provide services that cost half of what Bremerton residents are being charged. In regards to the recycling program, she has practiced recycling for ten years, but now her rates are TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 20 of 38 increased and half the time the garbage company doesn't pick up her recycling stuff. She stated she'll continue recycling on her own. She is sick and tired of rates going up for utilities, garbage and property taxes. Floyd Kern, 320 White Pine Drive, stated about a year ago there was a proposal to build a garbage burning disposal plant. In his opinion, that type of disposal is a coming thing and he was not pleased that Lindgren turned it down. He felt the people in the City should have a chance to vote on any proposal that has to do with incinerating garbage. He emphasized he would be willing to pay more on his garbage bill if such a plant was put into operation by Brem-Air. Robert Ackerman, 3706 Arsenal Way, stated a while back Brem- Air was before Council making promises of what they would do under the new contract being proposed. He questioned why couldn't this area be serviced by a company that came from within the state rather than an out-of-state company? He was also concerned about the possibility of Envirofil hauling in garbage/materials from other areas and dumping in the Olympic View Landfill. Archie Thompson, 1523 Bloomington, stated what is being discussed at this time is selling a monopoly. Currently, he pays between $10-11 for garbage and recycling service. It concerned him that garbage rates in Coeurd'alene, Idaho were less than $3.00 for a 30-gallon can and their recycling services were free. In the many years he has recycled, he has never had to pay for disposal of those recyclable items. He believes the $3.44 recycling fee the City imposed on the citizens is a "scam". He questioned why can't recycling be free? He also questioned why hasn't the City put out a bid for garbage service? Orton Johnson, 924 Callahan Drive, stated in addition to what has already been stated, he hoped that Envirofil would do a better job of recycling than what is being done at the present time. Everyone knows that the more recycling that is done the longer the life of the landfill. Currently, the curb side recycling program does not include corrugated cardboard, telephone books and many magazines, all metals except aluminum cans and high grade computer paper. He emphasized the residents are paying 1.9 times what the County is paying for service from the same company, however, the difference is that City garbage collection is mandatory and not in the County. He is impressed with Envirofil's management team, however, he shares the same concerns that have already been mentioned. TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 21 of 38 Lee Harbin, Norseland Mobile Home Park, stated he was sure Envirofil was aware that more than one lawsuit is being filed against Olympic View Sanitary Landfill and others. Earlier this year they claimed that the landfill may be the potential source of ambient air, surface water, ground water and soil contamination. He questioned if Mr. Humphreys had an opportunity to review these lawsuits, and if so, to what extent will be their role be in future litigation, if any? Don Larson, 135 Rainier Avenue, stated he has challenged Brem- Air since July 1989, to give single people fair garbage service. As a single person, he has been recycling for a long time. In 1989 the State passed the Waste Not Washington Act that stated people should recycle, reduce and reuse; and when you do all that you don't come up with a can of garbage each week. He did not know how one single person or ANY elderly people who generate enough garbage to put out one can per week. Brem-Air continued to charge him for one can per week and he requested them to comply with that law, which didn't work. He received a letter from Brem-Air's attorney on May 23, 1990, that indicated if Mr. Larson's bill was not paid within one week they would take action against him. His response to Mr. Camps letter was that they had a billing error and to please correct it, which didn't happen. As of this date, he has not found out what kind of action they had planned against him. He assumed they were going to follow the contract and place a lien against his property, but that did not happen. He has not received a direct answer from Brem- Air's law firm yet. He wants to know if this new company takes over, what happens to people like him. He does not want to sue the City or Brem-Air...all he wants is fair service for individuals. However, if a lien was placed on his property, he would not have any alternative but to go to court and settle the issue. Louis Coffer, 732 South Summit, stated he believed Council had the opportune time to renegotiate the garbage collection contract. He felt strongly that there were many things in the contract that Brem-Air has not lived up to as agreed. He was sued by Credit Bureau Inc., on behalf of Brem-Air over non- payment of services received above the $1.75 per month rate written in the ordinance and quoted in the contract for people who do not have garbage. He does not mind paying for service he receives, however, he does 100% recycling. He does a much better job of recycling than any recycler. Recently he spent $800.00 for a chipper/shredder and gives mulch material away to friends and relatives. What bothers him is the way the ordinance and contract is written in that every resident and business has to have garbage service whether or not they have TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 22 of 38 any; and they get billed for it. He questioned if the City was transferring that capability over to Envirofil? He did not have any concerns with the new company, but garbage is a real problem. Elaine Manheimer, 10195 West Old Belfair Highway, stated she attended Council's Study Session, held October 18, to listen to the introduction of Envirofil, Inc., to the City Council. She left that meeting feeling very concerned. She had asked several Council members to ask specific questions of Envirofil for her because the Study Session was not open for public comment. Ms. Manheimer handed out pictures of what Olympic View Landfill looked like in 1972, when Don Lindgren took it over. She also passed out pictures of what the landfill looked like in 1989. When Mr. Lindgren took the site over, he bought his property at the same time she did only she is located on the Old Belfair Highway and hers is still all trees and has the river and his is a disaster. She provided additional aerial photos that were taken in June of 1993, which shows the contamination. At the Council Study Session, she heard some mention of some philanthropic community minded contributions, which she admired until one views the whole picture as her group did at the meeting on May 26, 1993, which was set up by Mary McClure working with Parametrix, Inc., and Olympic View Sanitary Landfill. They told at that meeting that the estimate for clean up of the landfill area was a mere $20-25 million dollars and they wanted to study it for a couple of more years. Envirofil stated they have been working on this buy-out proposal for nine months...she said "welcome to her world", they have been working on it for over 3 1/2 years. Olympic View Landfill's own report, a Woodward Clyde Report that is available at the Bremerton/Kitsap County Health Department, shows contamination from the two wells they dug at 700 and 1,200 feet from the unlined portion of the landfill. Their report goes on to say: "it is likely that in the absence of beaver activity, this area would be classified as a wetland", it further states: "...the hydrology of the site is characterized by a high volume of rapidly flowing ground water". Their report further states: "Based on this evaluation on conditions of the site and on past experiences regarding landfill remediation, the implementation of a program of institutional control limited action is the appropriate course of action at this time. The institutional controls include monitoring, evaluation, evaluation of the land gas collection, leachaid collection, improving coordinating with local regulatory agencies. Ms. Manheimer stated this is exactly what is being done and it is not working now. The report goes on to say that structural controls are too high priced and not likely to be required. TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 23 of 38 She has to ask why not? The report goes on to discuss ground water containment actions, which are expensive and effectiveness is limited by the possible presence of chemical impact beyond the property boundaries. The report states: "that because of the data suggests the chemical concentrations do not decrease with the depth in the aquifer and regional information shows the Kitsap formation acts as only a partially affected aquitard. There is a possibility that leachaid from the old fall area could adversely affect the seventh springs aquifer that underlies the Kitsap formation. None of the ground water containment action would address any impact to this deep aquifer". Ms. Manheimer stressed that is the Union River and the City of Bremertongs drinking water. The report goes on to say that the recharge is only 21-26 inches per year in the South Kitsap sub-area. This is very convenient for statistics, but the Union River valley receives the most rainfall in the County and has a much higher recharge rate than the entire rest of South Kitsap where it is always included. The report goes on to talk about elevated levels of organic compounds, dissolved metals and other chemical parameters that have been measured down gradient from the landfill and the elevated levels are suspected as the result of leachaid. The elevated levels have dissolved iron, manganese, chloride and specific conductivity measured in surface water north and west of the landfill likely are a result of landfilling operations and may have been transported from the landfill via the surface and/or ground water. The report states: "The ground water usage in population, based on 12 users within a two mile radius...". Ms. Manheimer directed Council's attention to the pictures she provided and pointed out there were more than 12 houses located in the area described in that statement. She also provided a copy of a document out of the report that shows the water level and it does not matter how deep the wells are. She provided a map from the report that shows the Union River, the wetlands and some sites of sediment tests. Her concerns are that Envirofil seems to be establishing in small communities across the country and may in affect become controllers in a business with an extremely high profit margin. She questioned if they are targeting small areas for large massive dumping of "out- of-the-area" waste? She has been told by the Health Department that Envirofil wants to enlarge and expand the landfill. She questioned where would such expansion take place? The pollution is out-of-control on this property and is threatening the whole valley. This is further emphasized by the contamination of the landfills own domestic wells as shown by their October 12th request to the Port Of Bremerton for water hookup. Another concern is the apparent lack of disclosure of contingent liabilities from the four lawsuits TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 24 of 38 pending against this property, which are already in existence. These legal proceedings could easily result in millions of dollars in liability, which the City of Bremerton is a potential liable party. Her big questions is was full disclosure of the lawsuits with the contingent liability made to all parties concerned with the financing of this proposed sale? The past three or four years of working with various government agencies and bureaucracy has done nothing to alleviate these problems. Much money has already been spent on various tests but the sediment samples of June 1993 leave no doubt as to the contamination of the Union River and surrounding properties from heavy metals. Site # 1 is located on east fork of the Union River in a wetlands at the base of the northern most base of the landfill boundary. The wetlands are undeveloped and a considerable distance from eroding or development. Access to Site # 1 is through a path maintained by the property owner. The Amtest results show a high level of chromium, nickel and zinc, the evergreen study showed high levels of lead, concentration of chromium, nickel and lead at this site exceed the lowest possible affect. Chromium, nickel and lead are in the moderately polluted category of EPA standards and chromium is up in the highest polluted category. The chromium samples results at this site were the highest in the study. Ms. Manheimer stressed this is a residential farming area. The reports from the Health Department and Parametrix, Inc., and contamination of the domestic wells at the landfill show the spread of the pollution. She fails to understand why when we, as taxpayers, employ Commissioners, Mayors, Council members, supervising agencies and permitting agencies, such as the Health Department, that this information is not shared and fully disclosed between those entities as well as with the all of the people residing in Kitsap County because it vitally affects their drinking .water, their futures and their liabilities damages. Another round of lawsuits may be filed very shortly in this matter, and the City of Bremerton should be aware that they will be considered a potentially liable party. In consideration of all the information she provide, she wonders about a company like Envirofil that has only been in existence a couple of years and why they even consider purchasing Brem-Air for 20 million dollars and to add to it the additional knowledge of 100 million dollars in liability hanging over their head. The profits in this business must be even greater than she could imagine, but once again it will be the taxpayer who will have to bear the brunt of this ecological nightmare. She urged Council to not approve the transfer of ownership, which will only add another level of confusion to this matter and further murky the already murky TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 25 of 38 waters. Jim Adrian, 621 Washington Avenue, stated he is a resident and investment property owner in the City and does quite a lot of business with Brem-Air Disposal Inc. He spent a great deal of 1990-1991 serving along with Councilman Johnson on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, so he does have a background on some of the issues. He committed to submitting a list of questions to the Council President by Friday, October 22, which are to be responded to in writing. Some of the issues he will be addressing at this time were identified in a letter, dated September 29, 1991, that he sent to the City. Some of the comments in that letter were incorporated into the contract and some have not been completely resolved, in his opinion. He believes the City has done a less than desirable job in administering the contract with the contractor. This has been very unfair to the citizens of Bremerton who have expected their City to help them when they were in dispute with the contractor and also unfair to Brem-Air, who was complying with the contract and administering and interpreting a City ordinance at the same time. In his opinion, the City "threw up their hands" and left the contractor with the responsibility to implement the contract and implement an ordinance at the same time. The City was one year late in adopting and implementing an ordinance that was to be compatible with the contract. Finding a responsible party in the City of Bremerton to help him with garbage collection problems has been an impossible task. As was mentioned several years ago, no one within City government would step forward and take on the responsibility, but rather point at someone else as the responsible party. By the same token, he has experienced the same problem with Brem- Air when trying to get responses from them. In fact, he has had better response calling Mr. Houge, Brem-Air's attorney, to try and obtain definitive answers. He finds it very frustrating that he finds his City government will not help him in resolving disputes he may have with Brem-Air. The City Council, by ordinance, should assign a staff manager as a compliance officer or hire a new person. That person should be a City contact point for all questions, clarifications and any issues that revolve around solid waste. It should not be left up to the administration to make this assignment since they have had two years to take such action and have totally ignored it. Nor should citizens be forced to fish around for a responsible official who will at least return a phone call and try and help them when they have a problem. Household hazardous waste drop off sites - the City and County need to do a better job for the contract in collecting i TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 26 of 38 household hazardous waste. More sites need to be established and there needs to be provision made for weekend drop offs rather than every six months in different locations. King County is a good model for collection of household hazardous waste products on weekends. Bremerton needs a transfer station for large items - this is more important now since the City-wide annual clean up has been reduced. Requiring customers to drive to a landfill site may not be cost effective or possible for some citizens and may resolve in illegal dumping if the dump site is inaccessible for whatever reason. He has found that people have used his commercial dumpsters as convenient dump sites for their garbage, which the contractor picks up and them bills him. Compost sites in the City - the City/contractor should set up a west Bremerton and east Bremerton site for composting or shredding vegetation. Volume in the landfill would be significantly reduced if this was available and the resulting humus could be used for City parks or sold to the general public to recover operating costs. This is not a new issue and the citizens were promised this would be looked into and the City and contractor would have something on line two years ago. There should be some sort of body established by both parties, whoever has the contract, that would be used to settle contract language interpretations, disputes, etc., absent a Superior Court challenge, which is a civil matter and takes forever to get through. Several issues were brought up at Council's Study session about community involvement. He is very familiar with what Brem-Air has done, what Mr. Lindren has done and everyone should be grateful for that support. However, he felt this needed to be looked at from a different prospective and there are two elements: (1) community involvement, what does it mean and who pays. With an exclusive franchise the contractor has a monopoly or strangle hold on the market. Any company, whether Brem-Air or Envirofil, is entitled to a fair return on investment. Because there is an exclusive contract, it does not really mix in a true sense with a free market. Under most circumstances monopolies are illegal. Any community service comes out of the bottom line for which a publicly held company is held account to the stockholders and ultimately it comes out of the hides of the customers. As an analysis we should put a dollar figure on the community service work that is done and see how much that is affecting customer rates now or in TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 27 of 38 the future. He felt it was unfair of the City Council to talk about binding Envirofil, which is a publicly held company, to any type of community service. The bottom line is to minimize rates for the consumers and to assure the best possible service available. Does community service mean mixing it up politically? He would like a direct answer from the contractor on what their political corporate philosophy is on that point. Will the new contractor make political donations to the campaigns to those elected officials charged with over seeing the contract and representing the citizens? Can we expect the company to play king maker behind the scenes with large corporate donations to individual political campaigns. Corporations are typically amoral with a corporate political agenda that revolves primarily around the bottom line and responsive to their stockholders. They typically do not have a political agenda or political philosophy. Donating to elected officials who oversee a contract on behalf of the citizens smacks of buying the best elected official money can buy. Mr. Adrian stressed he believed it was bad business for any large corporation that has an exclusive contract to play in that arena. In his opinion, this contractor should not be playing in local politics. He questioned how long will Envirofil stay in Bremerton? He has dealt with the staff at Brem-Air and overall was pleased with their assistance. He did not believe the employees of Brem-Air have had good direction over the past year, but they live in our community. He questioned if they would be allowed to stay in their positions under the new ownership and if not, now many local folks will be displaced over this transaction? Education - throughout the 200 hundred hours of meetings during the development of the new contract, there was a great deal of "lip service" about education programs the City would see from Brem-Air. So far, he has received two pieces of mail that talked about education and basically told him what his recycling operations are and what he could place in the recycling bin. Previous discussions brought out use of public access television to help people like him, who are investment property owners, to educate his tenants, networking using public access television to schools and the contractor and getting kids up to speed on environmentally sound practices. He stressed there has been no agenda developed...neither the City nor the contractor has produced what was previously promised. When education on garbage related issues have been initiated from outside, Brem-Air Disposal Inc., was very cooperative in that effort. However, he sees no evidence of pro-active education of the public. Rates .... he owns properties both in and outside the City and TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 28 of 38 the rates in Bremerton are 39-60% higher than the County rates, not even considering the mandatory recycling charge. The percentages quoted relate to single family and two can service. He was not talking about multi-family or dumpster services. He questioned what can we expect from the prospective contractor in reassessing these rates we are stuck with? He encouraged Council to hold off on approving the transfer of ownership until the many questions raised are answered. He also felt regardless of the affection felt toward Brem-Air or any good works that Mr. Lindgren has done, the decision should be made on the merits of what Envirofil can provide and what service they can provide for the next eight years. In his opinion, this is the most or one of the most important issues that Council will deal with during their term of office. If you look at the out dollars of this proposal at the present value, you would be looking at a 20-30-40 million dollar package. This is no small item and he believed Council needed to take the time necessary to make sure the right decision is made on behalf of the citizens of Bremerton. Glenn Jarstad, 2823 Hefner, stated his involvement in garbage in the City of Bremerton goes back a full 30 years when he was elected to serve as the Mayor of the City. In those early years there weren't too many rules and regulations. He acknowledged there are millions of dollars in liability pending with the lawsuits that have been filed on impacts of pollution from garbage landfills. He acknowledged City had benefited from the taxes collected on garbage collection. He related a conversation he had with the person who owned the garbage collection service prior to Mr. Lindgren that at the time he sold the business to Don Lindgren he viewed him as a man of vision, someone who would do the right thing and had the goodwill of Bremerton at heart. Mr. Jarstad felt some tribute should be paid to both Don and Bev Lindren for their life's work into Brem-Air and their commitment to the many worthwhile causes they supported over these past years. At the time the Navy built the steam plant in the shipyard, he was very interested in solid waste disposal. He was invited to the first meeting that the Navy held on building the steam plant. At that time, the public was encouraged that a steam plant was to be built that could compact garbage in Kitsap County and use it as fuel for the plant. While Mayor, he had an opportunity to visit Germany and tour two garbage burning plants that were built and functioning in that country. The Navy put the option of garbage burning in their planning of the steam plant, however, later on they decided to go with low sulfur coal fuel. He was sorry that decision was made by the TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 29 of 38 Navy because there are some real problems with garbage disposal throughout the United States. In response to previous testimony, the City gets its water from the McKenna Falls area of the Union River, not from the river itself. He felt it was very difficult in the private business field to have language in the contract requiring the City to pass judgement on the transfer of ownership of the garbage company. Such language was not in the contract when Mr. Griffin sold to the Lindgrens. He emphasized Council does have a very serious contract to consider, which is a major utility and as a utility a lot of the rates must conform to State Utility laws. He also pointed out Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is a very large contributor of garbage in Kitsap County. He felt it was very important to have a good group of people, who are very skilled and up-to-date on what's ahead for landfill operations and garbage disposal. He personally didn't feel his garbage bill of $12.00 per month was very high. He believes Council's basic responsibility is to determine if they are comfortable with a company, who has made an offer to purchase Brem-Air. If Envirofil is deemed an upstanding company and responsible people, then he felt Council should approve the transfer of ownership. He publicly thanked the Lindgrens and felt they gave their life to a utility that served the residents of Bremerton well. John Law, 2129 E. 17th Street, stated he had listened to others' concerns and admired the talent that Envirofil has brought in from Texas and California. He felt their talents should be recognized and "our" lack of expertise should also be recognized. He suggested taking advantage of some outside advice and recommended someone like Steve DiJulio, who has handled other City legal cases, to provide the necessary expertise in this area in order to protect everyone's interest. Right now he did not feel confident that anyone in the Council Chambers had the expertise that Envirofil has going into this decision and felt the City should have a level "playing field". Mr. Hanna, Acting City Clerk, read into the record a letter received from Helen David, 1503 Carr Blvd.: "There should be changes in any contract between the City of Bremerton and the private contractor for garbage collection and recycling. I am fighting for choice to have garbage collection or not. Since I am a retired person living alone, I generate relative no garbage, approximately two sacks per year. I do not eat canned foods nor drink from aluminum cans. I also compost what little kitchen waste I have and do not subscribe to any daily papers or magazines; and utilize my son's garbage can for anything I deem necessary to throw away. I recycle one TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 30 of 38 small sack each year at recycle drop points. I do not put out a garbage can at all or recycling bins, therefore, I resent being charged for services I don't want or need and am not receiving. I have brought this to the City's attention before to no avail. It was suggested to me that I should purchase a 20 gallon can to reduce collection fees. This means that I should spend money on a can that I don't need so that I can put out my empty garbage can for weekly collection. Since I am being charged a full rate for no can, this would reduce the fee I am being charged for services I am not receiving. There are other solutions to this dilemma, such as creative collection procedures: (1) consumer purchase of tags to be placed on garbage cans for collection. This would eliminate some billing procedures also if a household opted for weekly collection, tags would not have to be purchased and billing and weekly collections could remain status quo; (2) have regular collection in multiples of months, rather than weekly. When I suggested this to the City previously, the reply was a reduced rate for recycling was being considered for senior citizens. This is not what I am protesting, however, I think that is a good idea but another issue. I am not a senior citizen but am on a disability income, but again, that is not the point. I want to make it clear that I am against mandatory fees for garbage collection and recycling and for choice. I believe the City has ignored my complaints as evidenced by the suggestions and replies. There are many citizens who have the same thoughts and feelings as I do as proven by the response to her letter to the editor in the Bremerton Sun. Give us back our choices that America stands for". Mr. Humphreys stated most of the concerns voiced could be categorized as either complaints against the current system or problems with the landfill or simply some negative reaction to the current rate structure and some lack of accessibility to people at the Brem-Air facility when complaints arise. He assured everyone that what success the City and residents had with the current system dealing with problems and service and what lack of success existed, they will focus on from the beginning. Those things that the public likes they will try to maintain and those things that people don't like they hope to improve upon them. The notion that this is an out-of-state acquisition and seeking local ownership is a little bit of an illusory issue. What you will find is most of the good things about Brem-Air will remain the same, good people will remain the same and they do not foresee any radical work force changes. They understand the collection operation is staffed through a Teamster's Contract, who they have worked with in other parts of the country and plan to work with in New ! TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 31 of 38 Jersey. There are no significant plans, in terms of some work force change, that would be negative to the collection operations. He believes accessibility will increase under their management. They see the new waste management industry being driven by service. In response to the question will they have people on site to address questions, he believed the public will find that Envirofil is as service oriented as any garbage company that has served this area and they would like to think service will improve and that the openness of management to new ideas and to complaints about garbage service will be high. He conveyed assurance that Doug Asay will be available virtually around the clock during the near term. He did not believed any one would see a distinct negative change brought by the sale to a "out-of-state" firm. Basically, there will be the same people doing what they have been doing for years, but hopefully with a little bit of a layer of oversight, technical expertise and financial backing that allows this company, on the collection side, to move into a new world of higher rates of recycling, struggling with the many issues of recycling and what that does to the citizens as a consumer of these services. Envirofil believes that not only will the citizens see a little more attention to detail, but will have, on the disposal side, a group that can deal with the problems as they exist with any old landfill that has an unlined portion. The current active disposal facility is in compliance with the latest regulations, the old unlined portion of the facility did have some problems and they spent the better part of the last six months attempting to decipher those problems and determine whether or not they were manageable. He will state that was not a simple process and not one about which they were cavalier; and it was one that their financiers and public stockholders are knowledgeable of. They have toured landfills all around the world and these are not problems that are unique to the Olympic View Landfill, nor are they problems they think are unmanageable. Does the City have a responsibility for any of those problems? Any generator of waste to a site that contaminates ground water has a responsibility, so it is to the City's benefit to have a little more technical expertise on the disposal side when you are the principal generator. The question there is whether you would have a continuation of the processes that have been put into place or maybe enhancement of them. He assured Ms. Manheimer that they have looked at all the things she has looked into. There are difficult issues facing any entrant into the solid waste business these days and they think they have engaged a group that is about as able to address those issues and work hand-in-hand with the City and County as any company in the country. TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 32 of 38 Laidlaw Waste Systems is where the a couple of their people have come from, not Laidlaw Transportation, which is an entirely different company. Envirofil management is not impressed with Laidlaw Transportation management practices. New technologies - garbage incineration, composting...he assured everyone that if there are technologies that make sense economically, environmentally, scientifically they have considered them. They have discussed, in Washington, some of these technologies andknow what the current administration in the State of Washington thinks about incineration, reduction, recycling, etc., and he believes Envirofil can bring in some fresh ideas in those areas. There will be issues to consider in the future. They will engage in a thorough analysis of what services are being provided to Bremerton, what services are being provided to the County residents and what they are paying compared to what City residents are paying and why any disparity exists. On the issue on what happens to people who do not generate any waste...they want to figure out all of these things, however, they do not have all the answers at this time. They have not had the opportunity to actually drive around on the collection routes to see what is actually being expended to provide the level of service that Bremerton is receiving. They have pledged to the Mayor and City Council to look at all of these issues and there is nothing that is sacred what the City is getting now, in terms of service, and what citizens are having to give up for it. Envirofil just does not know what is going on in either the City or County or what kind of gratuities do exist in those two engagements. Education - they do feel strongly about education in the schools and teaching children about what is happening across the country with the waste shed and what it can be dealt with in a way that is better than it has been dealt with in the past. They are interested in getting the Brem-Air people involved in this process. In summary, he concluded with the statement that they are here because they intend to be in the community. They are going to own Brem-Air Disposal and wish to honor this contract in a way that makes the City and citizens happy. They want to run the landfill in a way that protects the City and makes the citizens of the Union River-shed happy and to be a good partner in the community. If this contract is transferred, he predicted that a lot of their people will be visible within the community. TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 33 of 38 Mr. Johnson questioned if the City had received supplemental submissions to Envirofil's 10K form for items 10, 11, 12, 13 of Part III, which covers certain relationships and related transactions, security ownership of certain beneficial owners in management, executive compensation, directors and executive officers of the company? Mr. Humphreys stated no, that information has not yet been filed with the UTC. Mr. Johnson questioned when would the City receive them? Mr. Humphreys stated that documentation will be filed before 120 days after the fiscal year. He would provide Council with copies assoon as they are filed with the FCC. Submittal of those documents are due on October 27. The City does have substantial information in some of the other documents that were provided to Kathleen McCluskey . The Director and Executive Officer information is included in the Agenda packet. He emphasized there is no financial information on Envirofil's revenues or income in the supplemental documentation other than information on salaries and options and executive compensation. Mr. Johnson stated Envirofil's security ownership and who is buying who and who owns what is very financial and of interest to him. He questioned if the City had the amendment to the contract to implement multi-family in February in place? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated he did not have the amendment to the contract, but there was a commitment to defer negotiating that amendment. Mr. Johnson questioned if the billing was taken care of where the City was miss billed for asphalt and concrete? Mr. Hanna, Acting City Clerk, stated Kathleen McCluskey's memo to Council did indicate that had been resolved in the City's favor. Mr. Johnson stated he noticed by the Dow Jones Service that on October 12 Envirofil went from small capital NASDEC listing to a Nation listing and questioned if that was good news and what did it do to the value of their stock? Mr. Humphreys stated yes, it was good news and their stock did go up a little. That really relates more to liquidity. Mr. Johnson pointed out on Monday, at the Study Session, Mr. Humphreys stated their stock was trading at 4 and upon checking he learned that it was trading at 3.25 and now it is downto 3. Mr. Humphreys stated most of the waste management stocks got "hammered" yesterday. He emphasized they were not as concerned with the "paper" as they were with building a company that provides the best service possible. Mr. Johnson questioned the cost of acquisition of the Stockton, California transaction they recently closed...was the total bill 6 million plus 125,000 shares? Mr. Humphreys stated that was for both transaction in Stockton. He pointed out the Amidor transaction was not closed yet. Mr. Johnson noted then that leaves you a million dollars cash and 25,000 shares. He questioned what did they hope to get the other acquisition for? Mr. Humphreys stated TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 34 of 38 that was about right. Mr. Johnson stated if he is to believe Envirofil's proforma balance sheets he needs to know how all of these transactions come out and the impact they make on the financial status of that company. Mr. Johnson stated everything that he has seen of Envirofil's staff is very positive, but when it comes to the financial side, which is where you really determine the long range stability in the garbage business for the City of Bremerton, that has to be sound. Since December of 1992, Envirofil has done a lot of business. He is not convinced yet that he is satisfied with what he knows so far. Mr. Humphreys stated if Mr. Johnson wanted specific answers, he was certainly able to provide them. Mrs. Horton noted Council had in its documentation a memo that states the Bremerton/Kitsap County Health District was contacted and indicated the Health District interest is in compliance matters of the landfill. This memo states that the Health District did not do any background check and yet the comment goes on to say you are ready to issue a Permit when the sale is completed. Scott Daniels, Bremerton/Kitsap County Health District, stated that was correct. Mrs. Horton questioned how did Mr. Daniels know that Envirofil is a competent firm environmentally, if no background checks were made? Mr. Daniels stated they had met with Envirofil representatives several times over the past few months discussing some of the compliance issues. The Health District will go ahead and Permit the company that owns the landfill and will work with whoever owns the company to be in compliance with the regulations. Mrs. Horton questioned if Mr. Daniels thought, as part of that permitting process, since this is a company that is coming in virtually unknown to our local, that some background checks would be done to see what their track record had been on environmental issues? Mr. Daniels stated they had not done that previously. Mrs. Horton questioned how difficult would it be for him to do some kind of background check? Mr. Daniels stated with the Health District's resources probably very difficult. Mrs. Horton questioned if he could pick one issue and call one or two other entities from which they have dealt and get some sort of history on their past work. She would like some assurance that Envirofil not only has a good technical staff, but that they also have a track record in good environmental compliances. Mr. Humphreys suggested that Mr. Daniels talk with the owners of facility that were managed by some of Envirofil's management team. He believed any checking would find a very high respect for their technical, engineering and environmental capabilities. His group has been with the two landfills that they currently own for 6-7 months and upon TAPE #1143 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 35 of 38 checking those facilities one would probably find that they had been cleaned up some since taking them over. He believed Kathleen McCluskey spoke to someone in Illinois and Missouri. TAPE #1144 Doug asay explained Kathleen McCluskey did check with the San Venito County Director Of Public Works about his involvement in operating that landfill. He believed in Councilts documentation there is a glowing report on what was done at that landfill. Mrs. Horton explained she sits on the Board of Directors of the Health District and she would like to hear a response from them after checking into a more technical aspect than the City administrationts approach.. Mr. Asay stated the other thing Scott Daniels discovered when taking with Hubert and Lee is that he was impressed with the degree of howledge both of those individuals have. He believed it was on that basis that Mr. Daniels based his decision. In response to the concerns about the possibility of Envirofil bringing in garbage or materials from outside the County to dump in the landfill, the contract with the County is such that it is very limited and not possible. Mr. Daniels stated there is a Health District Ordinance that limits the amount of waste coming into the landfill from out of County to 5%. During his meetings with Envirofil representatives, they were asked many hardquestions regarding compliance issues and because of that the Health Districts comfort level is pretty high. The Health District was also told Envirofil was considering retaining Parametrix, Inc., who has handled the engineering needs at the landfill for many years. Mrs. Horton stated she did not want what she was going to say to sound negative in any way...she was not necessarily questioning Mr. Daniels' technical howledge, but what she was trying to ascertain was more in the realm of a technical knowledge and having the ethical wherewithal to translate that into every day "your going to do it". She wants some assurances that will happen. She is not questioning the integrity of any member of Envirofilts management team, but due to their very short track record there is very little to glean as far as their landfill activities. Doug asay pointed out Kathleen McCluskey did pursue background research into their management teams former careers. He was in charge of Newby Island Landfill in San Jose, California, which receives the entire volume of solid waste from the City of San Jose. He questioned do you think we would not be capable of handling this? Mrs. Horton emphasized she was asking a member of the Health District, of which she sits as a board member, to call someone and ask technical questions that Ms. McCluskey may not have the wherewithal to ask. Mr. Oversen stated when the City was renegotiating the TAPE #1144 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 36 of 39 contract one of the individuals he works with in the Shipyard knows Mr. Lindgren quite well and had a comment and he wanted Council to consider it for whatever it is worth..."you don't have to renegotiate with Mr. Lindgren because you and the County don't owe him anything because you have already made him rich". He was not sure that statement was true, however, he stressed keeping the focus correct. Mr. Overson expressed concern that the Mayor was not present during this discussion and had not recommended "endorsement" of the proposed transfer request. He questioned if there was a reason why Mayor Mentor had not commented on this item? Envirofil has probably assembled some of the best credentials he has ever seen in this kind of an operation. However, there are concerns such as the fact that in a few months they will own no fewer than nine companies, large and small, all across the United States. He questioned if they were up to handling all that business and are they that good? Basically, the issue will come down to what can Council do to resolve the numerous concerns that the customers are asking. He questioned if we, as the Council, can do anything to get guarantees from this new organizations that it will be as good or better than it ever was in the City? President Fitz stated earlier Mr. Law suggested that the City should use the outside counsel services of someone like Mr. DiJulio to assist with this process. She wanted Mr. Law and the public to know that the City has requested outside counsel from Mr. DiJulio and have had several discussions with him on this issue. She noted also that a representative from Mr. DiJulio's office was in attendance at this hearing. Mr. Johnson stated there was a proposed resolution that the City Attorney provided to Council prior to the Council meeting, which contained a "Whereas" that mentioned Envirofil and Brem-Air had entered into a written agreement that the City finds as satisfactory. He questioned if such an agreement existed? Mr. Sievers explained Brem-Air's attorney provided copies of such a resolution. Mr. Johnson stated maybe given the hour and the fact that Council had not received some of the documents, that this item should be tabled for one week. Mr. Waibel supported the suggestion to table or continue the item but felt it should be for two weeks. Mr. Colvin stated there is one items that the citizens of Bremerton are interested in and that is how soon can they anticipate a rate increase. He did not known the answer to that concern and if anyone could respond at this time he would appreciate their input. Mr. Humphreys explained the TAPE #1144 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 37 of 39 supplemental information from the 10K can be provided sooner than when it is filed with the FCC. If receiving this information in a shorter time frame would assist Council in tabling this item for a shorter period, they can provide the information fairly rapidly. Regarding the rate issue, they had mentioned they don't have all the answers as to why rates are at a certain level in the County and at a certain level in the City. He believes it is well within their ability to asses that information and it can be investigated fairly promptly. Mr. Collins stated there is one thing that needs to be brought out on the table once and for all to help people understand what is taking place and that is curbside recycling. He emphasized recycling was something that the City had no control over and is mandated by the State. He emphasized County residents will also be required to support a recycling program. He also emphasized there were other aspects of garbage collection that the City does not have any control over. He suggested citizens look to their legislators and to their County government as to why some of the things cost what they do. At the present time, Mr. Lindgren pays the County $54.00 for every ton of garbage that is dumps in his landfill...that increases the cost to the residents. However, that was not something Mr. Lindgren had control over or that Council had control over. Every citizen in this City needs to know that we have pressures that we have no control over and yes, it costs the residents unless the legislators or federal government can be controlled. Mr. Overson noted Mr..Colvin asked Mr. Humphreys when will the rates go up and his response to Mr. Colvin confused him. There is a letter that states the contract will be taken over by Envirofil and it was his understanding that the rates were established by contract, thereby there not being any flexibility. He questioned if Mr. Humphreys' believed there was flexibility within the rate structure? Mr. Humphreys stated he did not mean to imply that the rates were going to be anything other than what is currently in the contract. In terms of what they plan to do and what they have pledged to do is to see why they are at their current level. There seems to be this incredible pressure for Envirofil to justify that when they are stepping in after the fact and know nothing as to why they are at that level, why the County has a lower lever and why there is some disparity. Mr. Overson is correct, the contract price is in the contract. Mr. Overson noted that with Mr. Asay's background he was probably the person to figure out an answer upon investigation of that point. TAPE #1144 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 38 of 39 Mr. Johnson questioned if the City Attorney, as Council's legal counsel, felt the transfer proposal was acceptable? Mr. Sievers stated as Council was aware from past discussion, there are four criteria that needs to be applied in approving this transfer. Two of those criteria have to do with the quality of the transferee, the persons buying the company, and two have to do with making sure that all the loose ends are wrapped up with Brem-Air before the City allows them to transfer the company away. This letter is intended to satisfy one of the conditions as it states: "they will continue to meet the obligations of the contract for the balance of the contract term". He did not have any problem with that form. Past contract obligations and whether those have been fulfilled is another issue. As to future intent to comply with the obligations of the contract, he felt this was all that was required. Mr. Johnson stated he would feel better if Envirofil's letter recognized that the City is reserving its rights to deal with some existing problems today that will probably exist if we transfer the contract. Mr. Sievers stated that may be something Council would want to add as far as content to the letter. Again, it is a matter of a past obligation in that the City has had concern with some representations made that are related to the contract. A time for fulfilling those representations has passed, but is probably a continuing obligation to make those changes. Whether this should also reflect a continuing recognition in the City's reservation of those rights against the transferee, that may be something Council wants to add. Mrs. Horton stated the letter under discussion states that Brem-Air shall assume and discharge all of their obligations under the contract for solid waste recycling and disposal for the City of Bremerton. By discharging all of their obligations, she questioned if Brem-Air would still be responsible at some point in time if an issue of environmental clean up at the landfill came into play? If at some later date, it proves out that Brem-Air/Don Lindgren had some sort of responsibility for environmental clean up, she didn't want this letter to negate that obligation. Mr. Waibel questioned if it is possible, at this time, even thoughthere are no contract re-openers in the transfer of ownership, through mutual agreement that in fact the letter could include the agreement to go as far as Mr. Humphreys suggested he might in terms of not only determining what is an equitable rate for Bremerton's delivery, but also making those rates equitable throughout the County. Mr. Sievers stated he believed Mr. Humphreys could commit or make additional promises to those that are in the contract providing additional consideration if the City has some claims or concerns about its giving approval to the transfer. #0761 TAPE #1144 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes October 20, 1993 Page 39 of 39 M/S/C/U(Horton/Colvin) to table this hearing for one week. With no further business meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk EILEEN FITZ, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/EF/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault