HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/92TAPE #1033
UNAPPROVED DRAFT
JLIL ,i,
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
#0041
#0061
JUNE 17 1992
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, June 17,
1992, at 5:30 p.m., with Council President Lynn Horton
presiding. Council members present: Lon Overson, Richard
Neville, Eileen Fitz Hank Waibel, C. R. "Tiny"Collins.
Councilmen Morrie Dawkins, A1 Colvin and Russ Johnson were
absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City
Clerk, Kathleen L. McCluskey.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by
Council President Horton and Invocation given by Reverend John
Eichmann of the Bremerton Servicemen's Center.
President Horton announce Item 6A - Amendment To Portico
Contract was pulled off Agenda for one week
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Bid Award Recommendation - Janitorial Services
Awarded to American Building Maintenance Company In
The Amount Of $5,925.00 Plus Tax Per Month, #AB92-154
Bid Award Recommendation - WWTP Solids Dewatering System
Installation - Awarded To Pease Construction In The
Amount Of $215,793.00 Plus Tax
M/S/C/U(Waibel/Fitz) to approve Consent Agend~ 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.
M/S/C/U(Waibel/Overson) on June 17, 1992, Council does approve
for payment those vouchers included and further described as
follows: 151506, 151562 through 151742 in the total amount of
$496,575.30.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Overson reported his mother, who is visiting from Florida,
would be viewing the City Council meeting via cable access
channel. He was pleased to note the recent demolition of
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 2 of 11
several buildings at the corner of Chester and BuNell. He
anticipated the possibility of a parking lot and tri-plex
being built on those sites. He announced Council will hold a
"Goals & Objective" Retreat on Monday and Tuesday, 6:00 - 9:00
P.M., at the Senior Center on Nipsic Avenue. This meeting is
open to the public and he encouraged constituents to contact
their Councilman and let them know what goals and objectives
they would like addressed relative to the future of the city.
Mrs. Fit= reported last weekend she had the opportunity to
visit the Overwater Park along with many citizens who were
touring the park and viewing the statuary and Ship propeller.
Mr. Waibel stated he also spent some time over the weekend at
the Overwater Park and Farmer's Market. He hoped the Farmer's
Market could be moved to the boardwalk area soon in order to
take advantage of the larger crowds. As chairman of the
CenCom Board, he received a complaint from a constituent, who
listens to scanners regularly. Apparently, one of the
dispatches last week was to dispatch Medic 1 to a lady who had
a "headache". He did not believe that type of complaint would
qualify as an emergency situation, however, the City would be
charged as if it was an emergency situation. He requested
President Horton to look into that particular incident and if
it did happen, to correct the situation so it does not become
a common event.
Mrs. Hotton stated in reference to CenCom call costs, she
expects Council will be reviewing CenCom costs very soon and
she would investigate Mr. Waibel's concern. She announced a
Parks Department event - a Bizarre Bazaar on Saturday, June
20, 11:00 AM -3:00 PM, at the Sheridan Parks and Recreation
Center. This event is a teenager street fair where all youth
will have products or services to sell. Mrs. Horton viewed
this type of event as a very positive way to channel youth
activity and she urged everyone to support their efforts.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION - None
6B - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES
BETWEEN KITSAP COIrMTY 8EWER DISTRICT #lAND CITY OF BREMERTON,
#AB92-156
The contract between the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County
Sewer District #1 expired on September 30, 1986. The original
contract provided for treatment of the District's wastewater
by the City at its Charleston Beach Wastewater Treatment
Plant.
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 3 of 11
The District has indicated their preference for a new
wholesale contract which provides for the treatment of the
District's wastewater and allocation of a portion of the
capacity of the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant for use by
the District.
The agreement between the City and Kitsap County Sewer
District #1 allocates 0.40 MGD of the Treatment Plant capacity
for use by the District and establishes a service rate for the
treatment of the District's wastewater. The agreement
additionally provides a clarification of responsibilities
between the City of Bremerton and the District with respect to
collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of the
District's wastewater.
Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated he and the City Attorney
would addressed this issue in the absence of Bill Duffy,
Utilities Director. The subject contract is an attempt on the
part of the City and Sewer District to clarify issues of
ownership of assets in this area, accurately define service
areas involved by the respective jurisdictions/responsibility
for different elements of wastewater service and to formalize
an allocation of Wastewater Treatment Plant capacity among the
respective service areas. A question was raised relating to
identifying the service area, which is as follows: Sewer
District No. i is the unincorporated island commonly known as
Navy Yard City east of the freeway. The unincorporated area
west of the freeway is defined as part of the City's service
area.
Mr. Waibel expressed concern over the lopsided termination
clause favoring the Sewer District and questioned the reason
behind it? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated the reason
being the Sewer District actually has a property interest in
the City's wastewater treatment plant. The wastewater
treatment plant was funded partially with a capital
contribution from the Sewer District. It would be very
difficult for the City to terminate services absolutely and
this contract sets up a fair formula for allocating their
share of the capital costs and operation/maintenance costs,
billing them at a wholesale rate. Mr. Waibel noted then the
City would be committed to this contract for 10 years unless
Sewer District #1 built a treatment plant and decided not to
continue using City facilities. Mr. Sievers stated that was
correct or if the County picked up their sewage and took it
elsewhere. Mr. Waibel stressed that even if the City's
treatment plant was at capacity, such service to that District
would have to continue. Mr. 8ievers stated yes. Mr. Waibel
raised the question if the City Charter would be violated if
TAPE ~1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 4 of 11
the following statement was left in the contract: Secton 2,
last sentence..."Nothing stated herein shall prevent renewal
or extension of this agreement beyond 10 years upon approval
and agreement of both parties"? He felt this would violate
the City charter considering the fact the City has other
documents that require not having a contract over a 10 year
period. He questioned the purpose of that statement? Mr-
slevers stated he agreed that statement was superfluous and he
was not sure why it was included. Previously, Mr. Waibel
interpreted a section in the Charter to mean having to go to
a new contractor once a 10 year period had expired. Mr.
Sievers interprets the Charter to mean that you simply cannot
have an agreement that extends beyond 10 years. If a new
agreement is renegotiated, it can be with the same person. He
was not sure if, in this case, the intent of making such a
statement was interpretation of the Charter. Mr Waibel stated
he wanted to have the ability in 10 years to terminate
service, if applicable. He was not part of the negotiations
on this point, however, he supported eliminating that
statement from the contract. He questioned if he understood
correctly that the City installed a $121,000 meter? Mr.
8ievers stated yes, flow meters were installed for this
District. Mr. Waibel questioned if the flow meters were
installed only because there is a District boundary line that
the City is trying to monitor or is there some other City
function reason for having them? Mr. Hanna stated to his
understanding the reason for those master meters is to switch
to a wholesale billing to the District itself rather than to
individual customers. President Hotton pointed out that was a
precursor to the proposed contract. Mr. Waibel questioned who
paid for the meters and their installation? Mr. Hanna stated
the City. Mr. Waibel expressed concern that in eight months
the City will only recoup the cost of the meters. Therefore,
initially the Utility would not be receiving any payment for
the operation. Mr. Hanna stated all of the City's investment
in the capital assets that are allowing fulfillment of
requirements of this contract have varying lives but are
significantly longer than that time period. There was a very
long and involved cost accounting process used in determining
the numbers in the contract. Mr. Walbel stated in terms of
the $121,000 capitalization that the City was required to do
in order to make this contract work, he felt both the City and
Sewer District should have contributed to that cost rather
than the City assuming the entire cost. He questioned if the
contract was correct indicting the meters would be operating
only one day per month? Mr. Hanna stated no, the meter will
be read once per month but the metering is done continuously.
Mr. Waibel questioned why doesn't the City use a full month
rather than a daily rate? Mr. Overson questioned what could
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 5 of 11
a daily rate be based on? ME. Hanna stated he was not
prepared to answer that question. In general terms, what was
looked for with the daily flows was to minimize the affect of
peak loadings on the City's system as a result of the
District's flows. That was the reason for looking at a
shorter time frame than the full month. Mr. Waibel stated he
did not see how taking a full month and dividing it by 30 or
31 shows the peak rates. Mr. Hanna stated initially it will
not. Mr. Overson pointed out the contract states the City
will periodically test the strength of the sewage. Mr.
Sievers stated there are penalty formulas built in for both
excessive strength and for excessive volume over the estimated
initial volume. Mr. Waibel pointed out that would be on a
monthly average, but did not address the peaks, which he
assumed was the reason for obtaining the daily rate. Since
the meters can be read every day, he questioned why weren't
they read every day? Mr. Hanna stated as he recalled, that
was part of the process of negotiation... they were looking
for a longer period to average out the flows. There are two
issues to figure in: (1) plant capacity necessary to address
peak flows; (2) by taking a longer average the City is getting
a better measure of the District's actually utilization of
plant capacity. In that way, when there are demand spikes
coming from the flows generated by the District, they would
not be triggering the penalty clause unless they are happening
over a protracted period of time. As a practical matter, all
of the flows coming from the District that ultimately end up
in the treatment plant pass through District owned and
operated, at the conclusion of this contract, pump stations
which are the limit on the instantaneous flows that can be
delivered to the treatment plant. Severe demand spikes of
short duration resulting in combined sewer overflows do not
result in spikes on the loading of the treatment plan simply
because the pump stations are unable to delivery those kinds
of qualities to the plant. The short and sharp spikes in
demand flows are not of great concern. What is looked at
here, is over a longer period of time where the District
flows, whether because of customer demand or something in the
system, are generating baseline flows that consistently exceed
the .4MGD that was allocated to them. Mr. Waibel stated he
had the feeling the "monthly" was too long to worry about a
spike. Mr. Hanna stated he was aware that representatives of
the District and Mr. Duffy engaged in a long series of
negotiations and felt this was a reasonable compromise.
Mr. Waibel stated the City was short sighted on the
termination clause, peak clause and in terms of the fact that
the City does not get paid for the excess for the first two
years of the contract. He felt in most instances the City was
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 6 of 11
coming out on the "short end" on this contract.
President Hotton stated the contract talks about sewage
strengths and if the District's sewage strength exceeds
"domestic sewage strength" the City reserves the right to
reopen this contract on the issue of whether there should be
a surcharge for excess sewage strength. She felt,
environmentally, if they exceed the domestic sewage strength,
the City should be concerned with more than just a financial
recoupment, i.e. how do we get the problem under control
environmentally to make sure the City's permits are not
adversely affected. Mr. Sievers stated there is a policy
addressing that issue with Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and when
the City was accepting leachate from the landfill. President
Hotton stated she wanted something included in the contract
other than just saying "maybe we'll look into charging the
District more". Definitive steps need to be taken to find out
where the problem originates and fix it rather than just allow
it to happen and then the City breech permit status with the
State or Federal government. Mr. Sievers suggested having an
enforcement or policing authority to go into the District to
find the source and bill them for cost of location to address
that point. President Hotton emphasized and to take swift and
effective remedy to get the situation under control. Mr.
Hanna stated there may be some level of misunderstanding - the
supposition is reasonable, because of the residential nature
of Sewer District #1's service area, that there are low
strength flows in the wastewater based primarily on
residential with a small amount of commercial. The
supposition is it would not be likely that this clause would
come to bear. In the event that it does, through the process
of sampling, the City would discover, for whatever reason, if
the strength of the flow exceeds what is acceptable as
residential flow. It is not necessarily indicative that the
flows being generated by the Sewer District are any way
driving the City out of compliance for operation of the
treatment plant and or destructing the biological processes.
It simply means that the loadings are greater than what was
expected and the City reserves the right to go back and
increase the billing because it places more biological demand
on our plant. From the direction of the early discussion, he
was getting the feeling Council had concern that toxic wastes
or nasty type things would be doing something horrible to the
treatment plant. That would be very unlikely even if the
strengths were exceeding normal residential strengths. It
would more of a case that there is a larger commercial
component to the service area than previously supposed.
President Hotton stated she was not making a supposition of
where it maybe coming from, but it could be residential areas
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 7 of 11
where people dumped paint, oil, etc., down into the sewer and
the City would be responsible for taking care of it as it came
through the treatment plant. Mr. Overson noted this proposal
is for a long term contract and no one knows what might be
coming into that service area. We, as the City, cannot
control what happens in that District area. Mr. Hanna pointed
out the City would have more assurance of being able to look
into concerns expressed by President Horton through a formal
contract between the City and the Sewer District. Should
something show up through the sampling process, then it is the
responsibility of the District, as the operator of that
collection system, to find and remedy that sort of situation.
In the absence of a contract, which has been the case for a
long period of time, those responsibilities are not nearly as
well defined as what is hoped to accomplish with this
contract. Mr. Waibel stated another thing this contract would
do is allow time to try and look at those particular peak
occurrences and determine how they can be remedied without
having to use the legal process of termination. Mr. Hanna
again referenced the paragraph on the top of Page 12 of the
contract that reserves the City's rights to reopen
negotiations. President Hotton pointed out that paragraph
only addresses whether or not there should be a surcharge for
excess sewage strength. It did not address "fixing" those
situations and she supported having something including in the
contract addressing that point. Mr. Hanna stated it was his
understanding that the District has responsibilities as a
Municipal entity and operator of a sewer system, which
includes monitoring sewage strength under State law and
aggressively looking for illegal discharges and activities of
that nature. Mr. Sievers stated the District does have
planning and maintenance obligations. He was not sure if they
had their own NPDS permit or if they were relying on the
City's. Mr. Waibel stated it may be the District's
requirement to only get rid of it safely and that would be to
the City.
Mr. Waibel questioned the percentage of the City's capacity
as impacted by the .4 mgd per day? He was concerned about
that capacity possibly being the difference between the City
having to expand the treatment plant capacity. Mr. Hanna
stated the Sewer District was similar to the Navy in context
in that they participated financially in the construction of
the treatment plant and the level of their participation was
that same ratio. The Sewer District and Navy have also paid
through the rates since the initial construction of the plant.
Mr. Waibel questioned if the District doubles their usage
through demand on their system, is the City receiving enough
funds to capitalize? Mr. Hanna stated yes. Mr. Waibel
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 8 of 11
questioned if the following statement would stop annexation:
"City agrees not to extend service to any resident within the
District's service area .... "? And, if any of those areas are
annexed into the City would residents still be serviced by the
District? Mr. Sievers stated it was definitely possible to
have another District providing utility services within the
City. The current state of the District's boundaries have
been an impediment to the Cityts annexation efforts because
there have been co-mingled mains. That issue is clarified by
the proposed agreement. Mr. Walbel stated he would like to
see more paralleling of utility boundaries with municipality
boundariest and he believed this proposal made it harder than
easier. Mr. Overson pointed out Section 10 - Regulatory
Compliance, answered concerns regarding testing, etc.
President Hotton questioned what happens if the District
reneges on their agreement? Mr. Sievers stated it wouldn't
lead to a material breech that would cause the City to
discontinue service to the District. More likely, the City
would seek a remedy for specific performance of that provision
and cause a disconnect and a City provided sewer to that
residence. The City would enforce that provision and not let
the District provide services within City boundaries.
Mr. Collins noted Sewer District #1 has had management
problems for years. He questioned if the contract was
assignable if someone else took over management of that
District? Mr. Waibel pointed out the contract does state the
City has the right to look at that but would probably not
interfere with it. President Horton stated she believed if
something happened to Sewer District #1, Kitsap County would
take it over. Mr. Sievers stated it is contemplated that
Kitsap County would take over management of the district some
time in the future. President Horton noted the County becomes
a "safety net" under all of these Districts. Mr. Sievers
stated in response to Mr. Collins' question, the City does
anticipate agreeing to that type of assignment by signing the
proposed agreement. Mr. Hanna stated he believed it was Mr.
Duffy's, Mr. Sievers' and his opinion that the provisions of
this contract are not a situation where City staff is lying
down or going out of its way to be overly accommodating of
another district. It is felt the proposed contract is a
favorable contract and the collective provisions will serve
the City very well. Mr. Collins questioned what did the City
receive? Mr. Hanna stated the City would have a clearer
definition of the responsibilities of the Sewer District,
which was not the case in the past.
President Hotton stated she believed this agreement should be
discussed in a Study Session of the full Council. She has
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 9 of 11
additional questions as they relate to Growth Management and
wonders how this agreement fits into that "puzzle".
Mr. Overson stated the Operations Committee did review some of
the concerns on this proposal, however, they did not have the
benefit of extensive study or other Council members points of
view. He also has additional questions but senses Mr. Duffy
has a sense of urgency to move this item forward. President
Hotton stated no one had apprised her of any urgency of this
document. She did not feel comfortable rushing this item
through at this point. Mr. Waibel stated he agreed with Mr.
Hanna in that the proposed contract is much better than what
the City has experience over the last six years. What he is
seeing through this document is the District cleaning up its
act and doing what it was suppose to do with the City picking
up all the costs and tieing into those costs for a 10-year
period.
Mr. Overson stated his biggest concern is with Section 11 (b).
#1455
M/S/C/U(Collins/Waibel) to table this item until it can be
brought before Council at a Study session.
7A - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON {MITCHELL REZONE) #AB92-157
Following its public hearing on June 3, 1992, the City Council
approved a rezone to add the "Limited Parking Overlay (LPO)"
zone to two vacant lots immediately north of Olympic Plaza
near the intersection of Seventh Street and Rainier Avenue.
The necessary ordinance has been prepared, with conditions,
for the City Council's consideration. The findings of fact
and conclusions on which this decision was based are
incorporated in the ordinance as Exhibit "C".
Ron Hough, Planning Manager, noted prior to the Council
meeting he had provided documentation showing the correct
proposal for 10 parking spaces in place of the previous
material provided depicting 18 parking places. He noted there
are four conditions attached to the Ordinance:
(A) The approved parking lot is to be developed to the minimum
standards for Class "A" parking lots, as specified in Chapter
VII of the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance.
(B) A solid view-obstructing wood or masonry fence or wall at
least five feet in height (adjusted to meet front setback
requirement) be installed to separate the parking lot from the
remainder of the vacant residential lot to the north.
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 10 of 11
(C) The applicant is encouraged to modify the parking space
configuration illustrated in Exhibit "A" to achieve a more
functional design within Lots 14 and 15 and eliminate the
ingress or egress through the alley.
(D) This accessory parking lots is to provide for off-street
parking needs of lots 16 through 20, of Voltens AK First
Addition, Section 14, Township 24, Range 1 East Block 001, and
shall be used only for that purpose; provided, however, there
is no requirement that this parking lot continue indefinitely
and the owners of lots 14 and 15 retain all development
options available in the underlying "Duplex Residential (DR)"
zone for possible future residential development.
Mr. Overson noted previously a concern was voiced about the
alleyway and questioned if it would be designated "one-way"?
Mr. Hough stated no, the City Engineering Department and
Planning Commission reviewed the alley and determined there
was a dangerous situation where it meets 6Th Street. Making
the alleyway one-way going north was not desired because of
the number of residents to the north and adversely impacting
those properties. What is proposed by the applicant is to
close off the alley access from the proposed area and use only
the Rainier Avenue access. Mr. Waibel pointed out the
conditions stipulate the applicant will provide a design that
will eliminate the need for an access to the alley. President
Hotton suggesting modifying Condition (C) to reflect that the
alley access from the propose site would be eliminated.
Debbie Franklin stated the property owners support the
ordinance as presented. She questioned if wording should be
included in the ordinance limiting the number of parking
spaces to not more than 12 spaces to meeting zoning
requirements? President Hotton explained the action taken by
Council did not link the parking on lots 14 and 15 with
required parking for the Olympic Plaza building.
Mr. Waibel questioned if the Class "A" parking space size
allowed placement of 12 spaces on the subject site? Mr. Hough
stated the parking lot shown in the site plan attached to the
ordinance is based on City standards of 8 1/2 ft. wide and 18
ft. deep. It may be possible to squeeze in one or two more
spaces, but that would not allow keeping all the spaces along
the north size of the building.
#1809
M/S/C/U(Overson/Waibel) to approve Ordinance, on first
reading, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of
Bremerton for property located southwest of the intersection
of Rainier Avenue and Seventh Street (Mitchell Rezone),
TAPE #1033
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
June 17, 1992
Page 11 of 11
including the change to Condition (C).
Mr. Waibel stated this process did focus attention on the
Limited Parking Overlays and felt Council has a clearer
understanding of how they can be used in the future.
With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:32 p.m.
~' ~ President
LY~~HORTON, Council
City of Bremerton
KLM/LH/me
cc: Normal Distribution
File/Vault