No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/17/1996 Special Joint Meeting 13:9. CITY OF, YAKIMA, , WASHINGTON SEPTEMBER 17; SPECIAL JOINT MEETING WITH YAKIMA COUNTY AND UNION GAP The City Council met on this date at 7:30 a.m. at the ESD #105 • Administration Building Conference Center, 33 South 2nd Avenue, Yakima, Washington. Yakima City Council Members present were Mayor Lynn Buchanan, Clarence Barnett, Henry Beauchamp, Ernie Berger, John Klingele, John Puccinelli, and Bernard Sims. City staff members present were City Manager Zais, Assistant City Manager Rice, Chris Waarvick, Wastewater Superintendent, Ray Paolella, City Attorney, Marketa Oliver, Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, Doug Mayo, Project Engineer, Judy Duval, Municipal Producer, and Deputy City Clerk Skovald. Yakima County Commissioners present were Jim Lewis, Chairman, Bettie Ingham, and Bill Flower. Yakima County staff members present were Dan Hesse, Director of Public Works, Dick Anderwald, Director of Planning and Special Projects, and Vern Redifer, Assistant Director of Public Works. Union Gap Council Members present were Mayor Dan Olson and Betty Boyd. Union Gap Staff Member present were Paul Burlingame, City Manager, Kathleen Holscher, Assistant City Manager and Sherrie Testerman, Executive Secretary. Representatives from the West Valley Community Council present were Shirley L. Doty and Gene Hull. - Representatives from the Terrace Heights Sewer District present were Norman Alderson and Warren Wayenberg. There were also members of the media present as well as a number of concerned citizens who attended this meeting. Commissioner Lewis welcomed the group, everyone in attendance introduced themselves, and the meeting began. Wastewater Issues Dick Zais provided some background information about the Agreement For Wastewater Treatment And Disposal Service (4- Party Agreement). He referred to the agreement as a milestone document because it is a plan for the extension of regional planning and wastewater services in the Urban Area of Yakima. Encompassing the many documents and material prepared during the past twenty years since the 4 -Party Agreement was signed, Mr. Zais directed attention to a report provided for this meeting which summarizes the investment and activity of the wastewater capacity and delivery system. He,pointed out there are significantly higher local water and wastewater rates in other communities because those communities had to do more on their own and did not obtain the kind of federal and state grant funding that this community has received and built into the system. The investment from the partners in this agreement is built back into the system in terms of resources that also help to offset the costs of providing service. The report also includes documents and charts that relate to where those resources have gone. He indicated further explanation about past upgrades, investments, or capacity improvements is available if there are any questions. Mr. Zais directed attention to future needs in an era where there are now significantly diminished federal and state resources and the demands are no less greater. That is the challenge -- how to pay for growth and provide continued service. 140 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 Chris Waarvick displayed several maps depicting the future location of interceptor lines needed to serve new growth in the Urban Area. On another map he explained where existing sewer lines are located including Union Gap and Terrace Heights data indicated in the Geographical Information System format. He also pointed out where the City has its collection system and its jurisdiction of obligation to maintain Terrace Heights and Union Gap. He showed the understood Interim Urban Area Boundary as well as the Urban Area Boundary and the City Limits of Yakima. Mr. Waarvick also provided general and technical background information about treatment capacity, provided figures on the maintenance and operations budget, and answered questions about the location of the various pump stations. Mr. Waarvick directed attention to the proposed Wastewater Connection Charge Program which is a system whereby the cost of new growth would be assigned to new customers wherever they resided in the service area. There would be a connection charge no matter whether residence is in the Interim Urban Area, the Urban Area, or the City Limits. Mr. Waarvick explained some of the differences associated with the proposed charges. Everybody pays for rehabilitation at the Treatment Facility; the portion of the charge that is for treatment is the same in each area; however, charges associated with the cost for expansion or system buy -in would be different, such as application of historical grants and the costs of interceptors and collectors. The City of Yakima has invested significant capital, not only into the treatment plant since the early 1980s, but after the Federal grant process. The City has also invested significant cash into interceptors and collectors in areas outside the City Limits. Those also play a factor in establishing what connection charge rates will be. Mr. Waarvick continued his presentation by explaining the rationale behind the Connection Charge concept versus significant across the board rate - increases for the rate paying body. Mr. Zais compared the amount committed to debt service payments for the Wastewater Operating Budget '" (approximately 25 percent) to debt payments and interest on the National Debt (approximately 15 percent). He touched on the philosophy behind the proposed Wastewater Connection Charge. This was developed in order to assign costs to new customers for necessary system growth and to address the major concern about how much more that the rate payers of Yakima can afford to subsidize growth on the premise of long term recovery. He again mentioned the absence of significant Federal and State investment for the future that's not any where near the degree that once existed. Mr. Waarvick reported there is cost recovery coming from the Federal and State governments for the industrial waste sprayfield which was significantly damaged in a flood earlier this year. The dike that protects the Treatment Facility has just recently been repaired as part of a significant cost participation program with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. So the point being that while federal and state grant moneys are not available, they are sought after wherever they exist and are used to their fullest. Glenn Rice explained that the Terrace Heights Sewer District and the City of Union Gap are wholesale customers and are charged wholesale rates. How they distribute that cost to their rate payers is decided by them. Council Member Beauchamp commented about the increased local participation in the future for not only sewer, but also streets and other services and the increased costs to the rate payer, particularly 2 141 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 the older citizen tax base. ,,Mr. Zais explained that proposals brought to the Council over time on - .th rate adjustments don't just get put on the table in a short amount of time and acted upon. The City Council has taken very significant care and time to evaluate, study, and analyze this data and the recommendations. To go through a rate study, a cost of service study, the rate analysis, rate recommendations and II decision making is as long as a year for a major rate increase to be considered that might cover multiple years because of all the impacts required to be considered. That is done with a lot of very deliberate and conscience evaluation of the impact that creates on the community and on the individual that are paying those costs. Bettie Ingham asked representatives from the Washington Department of Ecology, Ray Hennerey and Max Linden, to explain Ecology's position concerning independent systems within the new Urban Area that have been driven by the Growth Management Plan. They explained they will consider independent systems as an alternative to hooking to City service if it is cost effective; however, a public entity has to operate that independent service. There are parameters on whose jurisdiction; it is State held if the system is 14,500 gallons or less (about 30 residential hookups) and it is Department of Ecology held above that break. In response to several questions from Shirley Doty, the WA Ecology representatives explained there are various alternatives that could be considered. There are packaged plants that can be used to treat wastewater; there are lagoon systems; and there are water reuse systems. Tony Leita, West Valley Community Council, asked what would be the most logical answer from a clinical standpoint to meet the future demand for sewage in West Valley in the next five to ten years. He also asked if there should be a moratorium on hookups. Mr. Waarvick did not see the need for any sort of moratorium., .•:,.Although there are some restrictions to the West Valley interceptor line, 'they are only temporary or short term and those can be improved to allow for more flow. The Connection Charge proposal basically calls for hook up when the development is ready to hook up. Council Member Sims asked how many people could hook up in the West Valley area based on the $14 million investment. Doug I Mayo explained it is at about 50 percent capacity right now. Approximately 2,000 more homes could be hooked up on the existing capacity. The Capital Facilities Plan, prepared for Growth Management over the next 20 years, anticipates expanding the capacity of the plant by about another 6 million gallons to accommodate what is envisioned to be the service needs. A lot of the service needs will be from the west , and also from the east and from the south. Council Member Barnett requested clarification on the chart showing the number of available hookups in West Valley. Mr. Mayo explained the reference is to the household residential equivalent of 650 gallons per day which is the number used on existing houses in that area is an estimate. The 2,000 is a conservative number to estimate the future demand five to ten years and to prepare for that. Mr. Mayo also explained the course of action for hookups utilized currently. There was a considerable amount of discussion concerning various questions raised by West Valley Community Council members and Yakima County Commissioners and,taff. Included in that discussion included options for West Valley to meet future service needs in the next five 1 3 14.2 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 to twenty years. West Valley Community Council plans to hold a study session to raise awareness of the issue and to correct misconceptions. Shirley Doty asked about holding back capacity of the remaining equivalent households in the West Valley area inside the Urban Area Boundary. She also indicated that this is an extremely critical subject for the West Valley citizens whether they live inside or outside the Urban Area Boundary. Mr. Waarvick explained the need to educate the public that if development occurs farther out then the logical consequence will occur and there will be less hookups available. Mr. Mayo explained another way to look at it is that the system will continue to expand and the basic premise is to try to estimate where these new people would live in the area. There was a considerable amount of discussion about the future demand and the system capacity in the West Valley area as well as the costs involved to provide the service. Bill Flower stated it is more and more expensive for Yakima to treat this waste and it becomes more and more an option for those people who are not on the regional system to consider new systems and new technology. Those are smaller systems and are going up everywhere and they are effective and cost effective. There are residents that have a need, and it would also open up an option for the people in West Valley to consider what other kinds of services are available. There was continued discussion about the current available capacity at the Treatment Plant and the need to expand and the plan to improve capacity as required by DOE. There were also questions and discussion about the impact of Capital Investment from utility debt which is based on revenue assessment. - Mayor Buchanan stated that as he sees it, the City has put the pipes 2 '' out into the area with the idea that it would serve what was then " called the Urban Area and it would serve the area within those boundaries. If the County wanted to put in an additional plant that is beyond that Urban Area if that was cheaper, they would have to calculate where they would have to put the outfall from that, but that would save an awful lot of expense on expanding the current plant and it would save an awful lot of pipeline running out into the even further reaches of Yakima Valley. So that is a valid option for expansion. Dan Hesse referred to the issue of cost effectiveness from Ecology's view for a satellite independent system. He asked what are the guidelines associated with that, and when is it cost effective to site a satellite system versus connect to the regional system. Mr. Linden and Mr. Hennerey explained that it would have to be truly shown that it is a lot more cost effective than`hooking to the City system. The goal, looking within the existing Urban Area, is that anything within that area is hooked to the City system because a lot of finances, backing and support have been put into the Regional Plant in Yakima to serve the growth needs in this area. There's a lot of problems out in the outlying areas, such as the problem of outfall. Trying to find a place to try to take wastewater after it is treated is an issue. There are certain systems which can be considered such as water reuse, but there are certain requirements that have to be met to reuse water which makes it more costly. 4 143 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING.- SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 t . Dan Hesse asked Mr. Waarvick"s to?'' address``the issue of capacity from a biological standpoint and talk about the hydraulic capacity of the treatment facilities. Mr. Waarvick reported the Treatment facility is well positioned in organic suspended solids capacity. Bettie Ingham explained that they need to plan for the service needs for the next five to ten years within the new growth areas in order to be responsive to the needs of the customers. There is a need to educate the community about what the existing service is, what the plans for expansion are over the next 20 years, and what the Growth Management Plan encompasses. There is a need to do some type of community assessment of the development community and potential users of these new services to find out what some expectations are on time frames and bring this discussion 'together. She asked how can we be responsive to the development that we say is going to happen in these boundaries because with Growth Management, what were saying is, it's going to have to be ,within those confines. It ;seems as though that sets a tremendous expectation on local government for service, and there is a need for a vehicle of communication with our potential users. People who currently don't have service have an expectation for service. People who have made land investments and want to see an opportunity within some sort of concrete time frame when they can market that land and be able to sell the service and put the services on the land. Commissioner Ingham asked the group to discuss her request. Mayor Buchanan felt the wastewater issue should be made more readable for people who are not used to looking at this type of information and thought that would be a good place to start. There was a considerable amount of discussion about the request to develop a working group to talk about an assessment of the growth need and to identify and clarify the various aspects of the wastewater issue to make it more understandable ?Bettie also requested that the Development Community be included along with the same representation from Yakima County, the, City of Yakima, Terrace Heights Sewer District, Union Gap and West Valley. Council Member Barnett pointed out there are certain materials already available for the next five or six years. He asked if Yakima County wants to project it 20 years instead. Commissioner Ingham stated she wanted to be able to be responsive to constituents that ask when an area that they live in is going to be able to be developed. Shirley • Doty stated it needs to be well defined due to the County Comprehensive Plan process. In the' County Comprehensive Plan ,there .is a major issue of whether non - economically viable orchard lands or farm lands should be allowed to be subdivided and developed. ' Dick Anderwald explained the Interim Urban Growth Boundary is the area which utility service is expected to be provided. He felt expansion of the wastewater system or development of individual systems will not provide individuals the ability or meet their needs to subdivide land out of the Urban Boundary. There is no public commitment to provide urban level services outside that boundary. Mr. Anderwald explained the Interim Urban Growth Boundary is the boundary and the Urban Reserve is the frame of reference given to the land outside the existing service boundary. Shirley Doty pointed out that the service area has been expanded from the Urban Area Boundary to the Interim. Urban Area Boundary. Mr. Anderwald explained the distinction needs to be made 5 144 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 that the focus of the utility discussion has to be from the Interim Urban Growth Boundary inward rather than outward. He wanted to make sure that testimony received during a recent County Planning Commission meeting from a farmer who lived beyond the Interim Urban Growth Boundary, was not characterized as solving his need to sell off his cold orchard area and develop it to its fullest potential based on some expectation of public utility services. If he was able to somehow do that it would be the result of some type of a small system that might serve his particular project. Under Growth Management, the County is obligated to not permit urban level development outside urban growth boundaries or development that would lead to urban growth over time. So while those needs of rural residents are addressed, it is not going to be at urban density. It just can't happen. Mayor Buchanan pointed out that the pipelines are already out in the West Valley and development in that area can be relatively easy and price will be one of the things that drives it because they are going to have to pay the cost of getting hooked up. Beyond that it is a matter of cost to extend the pipelines. More pipes can be added on to the end of the pipeline, but if it is added onto long enough, expansion will have to happen closer into the Treatment Plant. So beyond where the pipelines are now, people are going to have to make a decision whether they want to try to go for a satellite plant or if they want to hook on to the end of existing pipelines. Then if they expand out there far enough and there are enough users, then some of these other people are going to come into play because the plant has to be expanded in time to serve that or it starts to cut into the allocation for Union Gap and Terrace Heights. So it is not something that will show an easy answer. It's going to be a fluid situation all the time. Council Member Puccinelli explained the City of Yakima also wants to know what are the desires out in West Valley. Yakima County is looking at the possibility of its own plants out there and he asked does West Valley want regional service. Mayor Buchanan reiterated that there are plans for expansion now and it is a matter of who wants to hook on and where and that means how much money do we want to pay to put pipes in. Doug Mayo explained the assumption is that the Yakima service area goes through the Urban Reserve Area. Mr. Zais commented that the City of Yakima would be willing to be part of a vehicle where constituents would meet about this program and whoever wants to communicate to get to an understanding. Commissioner Lewis commented that the 4 -Party Agreement does mention an Urban Area Joint Board. Council Member Barnett commented that the Joint Board does have some responsibility on disagreement. He would prefer this group include participants. Commissioner Lewis commented that the four parties should be represented and asked how should that group come together. He suggested an ad hoc committee to include suggestions from participants. Council Member Barnett felt that the staffs should get together. Commissioner Lewis felt the elected officials should decide and then get back to the city and county staff with one or two people from each jurisdiction and include West Valley and Terrace Heights. Council Member Barnett stated that the Joint Board needs adequate support staff. Commissioner Lewis commented that representatives of the City Council, County Commissioners, Terrace Heights Sewer District, West Valley Council, and Union Gap should be identified by the end of this week to get a formulation of the ad hoc committee. Council Member Barnett asked if this committee will go into the issue of wastewater facilities as it relates to the GMA plan. Commissioner Lewis commented 6 . 145 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 Vii, I that they will be looking how ti.to increase the participation to provide the necessary capita'ltzation forthe future of the Urban Area where the growth is going to occur which will involve some GMA issues with DOE and Department of Health; however, the main focus will be how to fund the wastewater facilities -- whether it be the Yakima Regional Treatment Facility, or independent systems; or semi - independent systems -- in the next decade. He felt there probably will not be direct involvement in other policies, but rather making recommendations that may impact those policies in order to increase the levels of communications and participation among Yakima County, the City of Yakima, West Valley Council, and the City of Union Gap. Shirley Doty commented that the West Valley citizens would like to be a part of the work group. To simplify the process Commissioner Lewis asked if each jurisdiction would advise who will be representing them on the Ad Hoc committee, hopefully, by the end of this week including Terrace Heights Sewer District, and Union Gap. He noted Council Member Barnett's request that a framework of operation needs to be developed: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 a.m. ' READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: ,-- ;'��'G G1 -� F , t2 COUNCIL MEMBE DATE t ) 6, ,,,(„/__________ COUNCIL MEMBER DATE ATTEST: "0( X 6 t } t------ ›2 ---c,9----6--P--11--- _ , CITY CLERK / N N B C' MAYOR Minutes prepared by Deputy City Clerk Skovald. An audio tape of this meeting is available in the City i Clerk's Office. 7