HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/28/83BREMERTON CITY COUNt"
SEWER RATE HEARING
FEBRUARY 28, 1983
l:O0 P.M.
A special public hearing was held by the City Council of the City of Bremerton.
Meeting was held at the Con~nunity Room of Great Northwest Savings & Loan, 500
Pacific Avenue, Bremerton, Washington, February 28, 1983, at l:O0 p.m., with
Council President Art Anderson presiding. Those present were:
E.L. Sturdivant Art Anderson
Spencer Horning Clyde Pachek
Russ Johnson Jim Adrian
Roy Mosely
Phil Drouin
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and the invocation was given
by Phil Drouin.
President, Art Anderson stated "nothing is set - Council has not made up its
mind yet". We are here to listen to you, the public, regarding the proposed
sewer rates. We do have a difference in rates since our last hearing. Instead
of an interim amount we are proposing the 1985 amount of $20.0~ to be charged
up to the completion of the project. There may have to be some sacrifices
to get down to this new lower rate. Single family rate has decreased more than
others. A low income program has been established with $6-10.00 per month for the
truly needy.
CH2M Hill presented the same format given at the two previous hearings. Bob
Card outlined the proposed building program and Drew Barton reviewed the rate
proposal. Single Family sewer bills (including 400 cubic feet) will be $2.70,
Volume Charge (O&M) 54~ per HCF, capital charge (fixed) $7.05, capital charge
(variable) $1.02 - estimated monthly bill $20.07. New figures for multi-family
sewer bill would be monthly customer charge (include 400 cubic feet) $2.70,
Volume charge (0 & M) 54~, capital charge (fixed) $4.86, capital charge (variable)
$1.02 - estimated monthly bill $61.62. Note: the average multiple family account
includes 4.60 dwelling units. Commerical I sewer bill - monthly customer charge
53~ (no HCF included), volume charge (0 & M) 54~ HCF, capital charge (fixed) $38.00,
capital charge (variable) $1.02 - estimated monthly bill $104.03. Commercial II
sewer bill. Monthly customer charge 53~ (no HCF included), volume charge (0 & M)
($/HCF) 85~, capital charge (fixed) $120.22, capital charge (variable) ($HCF) $1.59 -
estimated monthly bill $334.42. '
New figures for Annual System Cost First Year of Operation are as follows:
0 & M ($1,199,884;)Old Debt Service & Tax ($243,117); New Debt Service ($2,152,323),
Coverage ($807,545); Total System Cost ($,743,500); Less Other Resources ($190,000);
Equals: Required Revenues From Rates ($4,553,500); Revenues From Existing Rates
($1,589,170); Deficit ($2,964,330).
John Stetson, Department of Ecoloqv talked about their participating with the
city with technology and financial support. He reviewed the "clean water act"
which mandated secondary treatment of sewage. A priority list was devised based
on water quality and public health measurements with a three phase operation:
1. Plan facility; 2. Design of facility; 3. Construction of facility. We ~re
presently at the ~eginning of ~he "construction" phase.
The Federal Government is cutting back on funding and may be discontinued. Referendum
39 provides for $450 million dollars from the state which will be distributed
to cities. These monies will be obtained through sale of bonds and paid for by
residents of the State of Washington. aremerton was one of 27 co~nunities/cities
who applied for these funds and all 27 have signed contracts with the state. Bremerton
is to receive $22 million dollars through this program. We encourage you to complete
this program as proposed. If not, there are other enforcement actions which could be
utilized. Our objective is to improve the quality of the water. If Bremerton
proceeds it will allow expansion and growth within the community and should ward off
a potential catastrophe through a major breakdown of the existing system.
Art Anderson, Council President. The $20.00 we are talking about is inclusive.
Your old bill amount is included. Because of the new City Council coming in we
asked Department of Ecology for a 6 month extension which they granted and have been
totally helpful. Don't blame the State - they are doing their job. The Federal
government has set the restrictions.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Walterine Taylor, 2708 Callahan Drive. I am retired and on a fixed income. During the last
hearing ~I overheard a gentleman from DOE comment "they can pay it - they just don't
want to"]° Well, if they double what I pay now I can't pay it!
Larry Storey, 1521 Sereno CircleD~. Expressed his concern regarding the letting of
contract and cost overruns. He also used Paris, France as an example that a sewer
system could last longer than 20 years, as its system is over 300 years old. Also,
he asked can contractor be bound to the life of the system?
Bob Card, CH2M Hill. Contractors will be bidding on lump sum - fixed price. There
will be no adjustments unless deemed by a court action. People have referred to WPPS
and I again state that they received a variance which allows them to function in a different
manner. Normal change orders are estimated at approximately 5% of cost of project.
In answer to the question regarding the life of a sewer system - it is not uncommon for
sewer lines to last 100 years. Most companies who construct them do not last that long.
The contractor on this proposed project will give a 1-year warranty. If a longer guarantee
was given it may increase the initial cost to where it might not make it worth it.
Mary Lou Long, 2433 E. Phinney Bay Dr Ms. Long indicated that she is presenting
a Resolution to the City Council, which she referred to at the hearing. In this Resolution
she talkes about monies which should have been directed to the sewer fund over the past
27 years and the fact they they are lost or had been used for some other City causes.
A copy of her Resolution is so attached to these minutes and made public record for anyone
who wishes to review it. She stressed that the population of Bremerton is declining and
with the increased rates businesses will not move in. She asked that the City Council,
today, make an accountability for the money collected for these services over the past
years. Her closing statement was that she did not think the funding for the proposed
plan is equitable.
S. G. Milbrad, 1002 4th Street. Being a business for 80 years I am a $900 per month
pigeon. It appears that those of us who are residents and in business are facing the
largest public works project this City has ever faced. The economic impact will be felt
by us for years and years. In 1980 our sewer cost increased by 70%. Upon checking other
communities our existing rate is in the middle of the pack. I feel that the proposed
increase will put our local businesses at a disadvantage. Our alternatives appear
few and I hope the City Council will give a thorough study of these, and a decision
should be made after another Engineering firm has also considered them.
W. R. Coffer, 732 So. Summit. The day is long past since we can dig a hole in our
backyard and set a privy on it. We must stop wollowing in our own waste. I recall
that when the rates were increased it was indicated that we needed to "get money in the
pot" so we can repair the sewers, we'll have some. I don't plan on accusing anyone
for what is past. It appears that when ever someone wants something nice and new
they get it out of the general fund. I would encourage this Council on this project
very definitely set it up so that it cannot happen. Previously it was indicated that
there were some costs identified to the Police Department, if so let's identify it.
Secondly, I would like to ensure that later some other politician coming in would
not go in their and see that money and say "great" lets do something with it.
When it is paid for we don't continue to charge the people for those funds to do something
else we want to do. Let's do the things we must do first then if we have any money
left do the nice things.
John Fugatt, 504 Olympia Avenue. I want to thank Mrs. Swanson and Ms. Long for their
help in trying to keep these sewer rates down. People on fixed incomes can't pay these
rates.
Art Anderson, Council President. Several have mentioned their concern about control
on the project. We are very concerned and are taking extra me~jures to see that this
is done. We are asking questions, we are going to see that monies go into a fund locked
into the sewer, we ar~ going to have these things answered before we vote on them.
Mrs. Farrell (from audience) asked what type of chemicals are used in the plant.
Bob Card, CH2M Hill answered chlorine is used as disinfectant, in moderate dose,
and a polymer and it aids in the sludge processing also in moderate dose.
Joe Paul, 141 Sereno Circle Drive. I believe there is a bigger inequity between
family home and businesses. There has been a 200% jump in rates for businesses.
I was wondering why?
Drew Barton, CH2M Hill. The biggest difference is for the Commercial II class -
being that their sewer discharge is stronger than household and Commercial I class.
Drew presented the Rate charts again - outlining the difference is costs.
The Commercial II classification can be as much as 4-5 times higher than the
other classification. If this charge were not higher the service for single family
and multi-family and Commercial I classs would have to be higher.
Ivan Trimball, 2504 Cherry Place. I am surprised that you don't take into consideration
garbage disposal units. Could you explain the important or unimportance of a garbage
disposal unit.
Drew Barton, CH2M Hill. In making sewer rates for different types of customers you
can go to different levels of detail. The level that you usually go to is to define
strengths for a class. That means that there will be people above average and below
average but they are going to pay the average. For example, there are some households
with disposals and some without, some have dishwashers and others not so that single
family dwellings that have more people and different set of conveniences will have
strengths and quanity amounts of water used that are slightly different than the
average. In order not to complicate in order to administer the billing you rely on
class averages. People who are above the class average are getting subsidized a little
and the people who are below class average are paying a little to much. But, there is
not much you can do about that because the only alternative is to take into account
that this account has a disposal and this one does not, creating a problem with the
administration end. It would not create enough of a difference to administer it.
F. L. Farrell, 1919 Snyder. An estimate of 5% was given for overrun - is it a fixed
rate or could it go over that? Art Anderson answered that it was 5% for change
orders. My past experience has shown that contractors can write overruns faster
than you can keep up. They might figure a 50% overrun on a job like this and then
if you can't pay they'll sue you.
Bob Card, CH2M Hill. Except as defined by courts of law there is no legal limit
to the amount of overruns that could happen. However, they have to be the kinds of
things that couldn't be foreseen at the time of bidding. Typically an overrun would
be soils conditions that could not be cost effectively determined. The Department
of Ecology has establish 5% as a grant fundable amount for such change orders.
Art Anderson, Council President. These contractors will be coming from all over the
nation because it will be a large project. If somebody wants to add in a bunch of
money for change orders he'll probably not get the bid.
KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, CITY CLERK
ART ANDERSON, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
BI ERTON CITY COUNCIL
SEWER RATE HEARING
FEBRUARY 28, 1983
6:00 P.M.
All Councilman were in attendance.
Art Anderson, Council President reconvened the public sewer rate hearing.
CH2M Hill made presentation as previ,ously outlined. Art Anderson also
reviewed the change of rates as noted at the l:O0 PM Hearing.
Mr. John Stetson, Department of Ecology covered the same material as the
1:00 P.M. hearing. (Please refer to that statement for content.)
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Bob Duffy, Box 323. I am speaking for myself, I have an education and
Bachlor's Degree in Ecology Biology and Environmental Planning. I feel it is
essential that we maintain our waters. I feel that the proposal we are looking
at right now costs too much and should consider alternatives. Someone mentioned
a catastrophic failure with our present plants..well, this could even happen with
a new plant and I suggest that it would be wiser to have two plants to handle
the sewage. Another alternative I feel we should look into is the tremendous
energy cost transporting sewage across town in a pipeline. In the past few
years we have had huge increases in energy costs - electricity, gas, etc.
One alternative you could consider is less separation on the East side and
not putting a cross-town pipeline, rebuilding Manette plant and acquiring
additional land do it can be enlarged to meet the necessary level of treatment,
and scaling down size because you would not have as much inflow from the storm
water. Have you asked your staff for alternative suggestions? If not, I would
suggest that you do as there are pretty knowledgeable people on staff. I don't
feel the public has been given as good as notice as they possibly could have.
People have not been approached and talked to about the ramifications as much
as I think they should have been.
Maria Sagara, 1203 High Avenue. I am mad! A little has been done since the
last hearing in lowering the rates. I am also mad because so many of the chairs
here are empty. I too feel that not enough has been done to let people know about
these hearings. People who can afford to pay these rates aren't here to help
figure out how we, who can't afford them, can pay them. What happens if we don't
build this? I'm not interested in what other areas are paying. The new people
with new construction should pay more. It is up to you to fight for us if you are
working for us.
Aqnes Grubbe, 1133 Pitt Avenue. A letter was read as follows: We may need a new
sewer system. I fail to see why the rates should be so high for sewage when there
could be a longer time to pay the sewer system, and it may not work a hardship on so
many. How will the water rates be taken care of during the watering period in the
summer time?
Arnold F. Grubbe, 1133 Pitt Avenue. A letter was read as follows: In regards to the
high sewage fees, proposed in updating Bremerton's sewage system. When the project
is finished will the sewage fees or rates stay the same or will they decrease?
The future residents should be responsibile for some of the costs.
Katy Penman, 530 Bertha. I have been aware and perhaps many have been aware
of this sewer problem for some time. I would like to know how many people in
our district, Mr. Drouin, are on fixed income and how are they going to pay this
rate now and in the future? What will happen if people move out or just can't
pay it. What good will it do to shut off the water! If inflation goes up it
will have an added impact. I am concerned as fLhers are about these empty chairs
and getting people out to these hearings.
Mary F. Hawkins, lOlO Hewitt. Is this rate going to be on top of what we are
now paying or not? Art Anderson answered - you can disregard your old rate of
sewer charge but you will have your water rate on top of it. How will the new
water rate effect the sewer rate? Art Anderson answered it will not affect the
sewer rate but will increase the water rate.
John Parker, 1411 13th Street. I took the opportunity this week to cover 4-5 blocks
in my neighborhood to see what people feel about the sewer. What I found was that
they are not in favor it it. However, they are not here tonight to show that
disfavor. I am president of the Central Neighborhood Association and we have
a meeting on March 8, at that time I am sure this issue will be discussed. It
appears we are getting nowhere. Quite a few people in my area are on fixed incomes
John Parker Cont. I don't know the solution or why we can't get people out
but I do believe we should come up with something better than is on this piece
of paper.
Kal Leichman, 205 Hiqh Avenue. I endorse the statements.made by the previous
speakers. He read an article from the Seattle Times Newspaper - February 23 issue
regarding "Metro droppes unpopular sewer plant". His point regarding this was that
the people at Metro listened to the citizens and hoped that this Council will do
the same for us.
Lena Swanson, 2123 Snyder. It seems we have made some progress since the last hearing.
CH2M Hill talked about dropping some facilities with the reduced rate. I would
very much like to know what they were. I have heard rumors that Hewitt Avenue would
be included in storm drain proposal. That they would be included in this project.
I object to that - I have paid for my storm drains and I do not plan on paying for
someone elses. I do endorse the storm drain utility plan, with and operation and
maintenance fee for those already in process. $20.00 - I'm dealing with senior
citizens and just don't know what will happen. My question of how much pollution
has come from Rocky Point, Marine Drive and the marina has never been answered.
If we do use electric pumps to transport sewage across town, who will absorb
the increases in utility costs? Will that be passed on to the sewer users?
Mrs. Swanson again explained her proposal as stated in previous hearings.
Bob Card, CH2M Hill. The questions on energy cost - the energy cost of projected
1985 cost for the transfer from the Manette or Lebo site are approximately 50~
per month for the average rate payer.
Steve DeWitt, 1911½ 9th Street. I came here with an open mind and after listening
to everyone I have a deep feeling for the elderly and those on fixed income.
Most of the East Bremerton residences are the elderly - what is going to happen
to these areas when these people pass on. The younger people who can afford these
rates are living out on the east side on out in the suburbs of Bremerton. I think
alternative plans must be found for a lower price. Mr. DeWitt stated he did not
feel the City Council was paying close attention to what the people were saying
here tonight.
Will Warren, 2520 Stephenson. Has anyone looked into the County system and the
possibility of hooking into it? The only plan I have heard about is the one being
proposed and I can't afford the proposed rates as I am on a fixed income.
I believe that hooking in to the County System would cost half as much.
Art Anderson, Council President. Mr. Anderson stated that the City Council is
sitting here - saying nothing. They are listening to the testimonies so that
they can give their most serious consideration to the decisions that must be made.
There are 9 independent thinkers on the Council - listening to you. We have only
been in office 7 weeks and have taken the brunt of this for what has gone on for
the past lO years. Please do not get up and insult CH2M Hill, the State or us.
We are here to get facts. In answer to the question about other plans available,
we have 2 volumes of alternate plans and they are available to all who wish to
review them. CM2M Hill have been working 2-3 years on this and when the final
plan was developed it was taken to an outside consulting firm and they concurred
in that it was the most economical plan for Bremerton sewer problems.
Bob Card, CH2M Hill. In answer to the question regarding hooking up to the
County's system - located several miles north of Bremerton - this was looked
into and concluded that it was substantially more expensive at that time.
The plant currently has about 1/2 capacity what Bremerton needs totally and
would have to be expanded by a factor of 2 to handle Bremerton's wastewater.
It would be farther to pump than it would be to pump across Bremerton as proposed.
Ruth Davie, 1511 Park Avenue. What you are paying for is lack of foresight.
The citizens are at fault that this was not done before. I do not feel that
enough effort to get out to the people has been made. This time period is not
enough. Mrs. SwanSon objects to Hewitt Avenue being included in the project -
why not object to Manette. This town has had that protected fund since 1958 and
I do not believe one dime has gone into it. I don't blame you guys!
R. R. Davies, 1541 Shorewood Dr. When old sewers were built everyone paid a flat
rate. Now under the new one small business and big businesses are different
why? Drew Barton answered with the explanation regarding the differences in
strength of the different classes. Mr. Davies felt we should pay as we go and
that there should not be a difference in rate for anyone.
Mary Lou Long, 2433 E. Phinney Bay Dr. How many hookup are using Bremerton
sewer - answer - 9,600 inside and outside. Ms. long stressed that the U.S.
Navy should be participating more in the way of financial support. She referred
(3)
Mary Lou Lonq Cont.
to a letter from Frank Randall, County Official, to Frances Hadden Morgan.
It indicates that the Navy was using 41.6% of the new wastewater facility in
Brownsville. They paid 41.67% of the project. After analyzing the percentage
the Navy is proposing to contribute to this project is 10% of their estimated
usage and their estimated usage, by Mr. Card, will be 25%. This is another reason
why the US Navy should be sharing more of the cost. Bremerton has had a consistent
population and a long time problem with sewage and yet the County managed to get
90% funding. They had a higher priority (the County), than the City of Bremerton.
The county did not have the population nor the critical flow to the Puget Sound.
Why has Bremerton been on a lower priority? She referred to a Resolution Which she
will present to the Council at their next meeting asking for an accounting of the
funds that the citizens have been paying the City for sewer development.
Bob Card, CH2M Hill. In answer to the question - how the Navy's share was determined
I can assure everyone that the majority of the people want the Navy to pay their
fair share. The Navy's share, approximately 5.1 million dollars, is what we term
a technical share and the City is free to pursue other funds from the Navy.
On a purely technical basis, even though the Navy contributes as much as 20% flow
to the treatment plant the project is made of many elements and the Navy does not
have flow in every element. How it is determined - all the Navy's facilities -
shipyard, housing in various places the flow is tracked from all those facilities
through the city's system and when i t arrives it is determined how much more it
costs (the Navy's proportion) and this is put into a tally. The Navy makes "0"
contribution to many of the facilities. Technically we cannot include a cost
of the project where they do not have any facilities.
M. E. "Joe Crawford, 108 Bloomington. Question for the State - why is the Federal
money not matched by the state? The Navy is a customer - they are paying their
share of 'the bill - it should be part of the city's funds and the State should be
matching their money. We are actually 2½ million dollars short from the State.
Do not think we are getting a fair shake.
Mrs. Clark Frazer, 1028 Burwell. After attending several of these hearings it
appeared to me that what they were saying was that the City Council was not going
to push these rates on us if we so indicated we could not pay them. I want a good
sewage system but I work so I can eat and if I have to pay $40.00 every billing of
the water/sewage, I never will be able to retire. If the citizens had a chance
to vote on this - you would not get one vote.
Lena Swanson, 2123 Snyder. DOE says 50% funding up to 22 million - I understood
$22,000,000 was committed. Art Anderson answered if project is less, they pay
less. I'd like to know where Bremerton is on the DOE's 1983-84 list?
What about the east side going out to the County treatment plant? Have you already
thought about that? Bob Card responded yes they had. It was screened early as not
cost effective.
Mary Hawkins, lOlO Hewitt. I want to contest this bill - when the sewer plant does
not include all of Bremerton and all of Bremerton has to pay.
MEETING ADJOURNED 8:30 PM.
FJ~THLEEN MCCLUSKEY, CITY CLE'RI~
ARY ANDERSON, CO(JNCIL PRESIDENT