HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/2003 Adjourned Meeting 305
ADJOURNED. MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003 - 6:30 P.M.
YAKIMA VALLEY MUSEUM
2105 TIETON DRIVE
1. ROLL CALL
Present:
Council: Mayor Mary Place, presiding, Council Members Clarence Barnett,
Lynn Buchanan, Paul George, Larry Mattson, John Puccinelli, and
Bernard Sims
Staff: City Manager Zais, City Clerk Roberts, Dueane Calvin, Water &
•
Irrigation Manager; David Brown, Water & Irrigation Engineer, and
Records Clerk Watkins
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON UPDATED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR THE IRRIGATION
CAPITAL PROGRAM
City Manager Zais described what has taken place to date. The City has recently
completed litigation and achieved a negotiated settlement over disputed water
rights. This litigation, referred to as the Acquavella water rights lawsuit, has been
ongoing for over twenty -five years. The City reached •agreement with the State of
Washington, the Department of Ecology, the Federal Government, and the
Yakama Nation to create more certainty about the City's water rights and remove
future liabilities and adverse claims against those rights. This decision removed us
from the case but also imposed new responsibilities. In the next ten years we have
to make a substantial gain on the loss of the water that now goes through the
irrigation system. It is a hundred year old system that has had only limited repairs
over that span of time. The City was unable, legally and practically, to establish a
capital reserve fund until 1998 when state law changed permitting us to do that.
We have to move forward in the next ten years and either repair /refurbish, or
consider conversion to domestic water and eliminate the waste and problems that
exist in the system. Both choices are expensive. Cost to rebuild the 308 system
(Alternative #1) is approximately $14 million plus an additional $5.5 million or so for
the non -308 system, although that it is less urgent. The choice to convert the
system to use domestic water and enhance domestic water treatment capability by
upgrading the plant (Alternative #2) brings the price closer to $27 million. How it
affects the individual ratepayer and additional options for funding are provided in
the material handed out. There have been many community meetings and citizens
meetings as well as a citizen's committee that worked on this for several years.
Their recommendation is included in the material handed out as well. The material
is both detailed and summarized. This is not just an issue of economics but also a
quality of life issue. We have enjoyed this system for 100 plus years and have
become very accustomed to the service and its benefits. This is a decision the City
Council must make after considering all public testimony and deliberating carefully
on which choice is the best one for Yakima.
306
ADJOURNED MEETING — FEBRUARY 18, 2003
Dueane Calvin, Water and Irrigation Manager, said an irrigation utility was created
in 1998 and a rate adjustment was made at that time for operational maintenance
and capital improvements. He described the options being considered.
Alternative #1 is a rebuild of the entire irrigation system. The charges for that will
be based on square footage as there is no other way to judge usage without a
water meter. The total cost of the rebuild is approximately $19,200,000 after
applying some monies already collected. Mr. Calvin elaborated on the work that's
• been done to date. We have collected almost $3 million and have spent $1.5
million on actual projects, putting new pipe into the ground. We have completed a
master plan and know what it would take to accomplish the rebuild alternatives.
We still have to do the construction design and that could cost a large amount of
money but is required to move forward. Alternative #2, the conversion to
domestic water, will add another $5 million to the total package. On the Fact
Sheet, Alternative #2 describes what it would cost on a bi- monthly basis and
annually. That information is available in the Fact Sheet for all the alternatives.
" Alternative #3 is a radical alternative to create two utilities, splitting the 308 away
from all the rest of the irrigation utilities. They would be separate and would carry
the cost of that rebuild, that is the cost reflected in the line near the bottom of the
sheet
For clarification:
• Alternative #1 - the annual cost for the rebuild is $196.80 per ratepayer.
• Alternative #2 - For the 308 customers on the conversion to domestic
water the annual cost would be an additional $56.40 (capital cost only, not
including usage of drinking water for irrigation) and all 18,700 water
customers would pay that $56.40. This alternative also includes an
additional water treatment facility to the domestic water system as well as
an accelerated replacement of meters throughout the city. The non -308
users would pay $36 per year on capital improvement as well as the
$56.40 for an annual total increase of $92.40 per ratepayer.
• Alternative #3 - the annual cost to 308 customers is $607.50 and the non -
308 customer would pay only $36 annually.
These costs are based on an average lot size of 7,700 square feet.
Mayor Place announced there will be another informational meeting held on
February 25 at the Senior Center in Spanish.
Robert Rogers, 217 South 24 Avenue, asked specifically what it would cost him
on his 14,100 square foot lot. He's in the non -308 system. He was advised that
with Alternative #2 it would be an annual cost of $56.40 and then based on lot size
twice the $36 ($72) annually for the capital improvements. Council Member Sims,
said he calculated it for his 10,000 square foot lot and under Alternative #1 it would
cost him approximately $270 per year and under Alternative #3 it would cost about
$51 extra a year.
•
2
307
ADJOURNED MEETING — FEBRUARY 18, 2003
Charles Callahan, 705 N 24 Avenue, asked how this came up all of a sudden
with the City expecting to finance it all in one shot. Council Member Sims
explained again about the 100 year old system and our inability, legally, to improve
it until the law changed in 1997. He then repeated the Acquavella lawsuit situation.
Council Member Buchanan brought up the block grant money and how he and a
citizen's committee felt it should have been directed, in part, to fixing the irrigation
system beginning about ten years ago. Mr. Callahan suggested that this should be
spread out over a longer period of time to make the cost more reasonable. Council
Member Puccinelli repeated how the Acquavella lawsuit settlement directs that
•
these changes must be made in a ten -year time span or we will lose water rights.
He then went on to warn about other upcoming issues that will affect citizens such
as storm water, new sewer rules, the ongoing odor litigation, and the Clean Water
Act. Mr. Callahan commented that in the last two weeks enough water went down
the Yakima River to irrigate the city all year long and asked why isn't the irrigation
canal filled. Mr. Calvin explained that all the water that goes down the river comes
off the hills below the reservoirs in the system and there is a big problem of the
reclamation of it. There are groups working right now in water shed planning and
alternatives to capture that water and put it into storage to be used at a later date.
Council Member Buchanan again brought up the CBDG money and how he felt it
should have been directed to fix these irrigation problems. Council Member
Puccinelli countered that the CBDG money is meant for the whole target area.
There are 48,000 people who live in that area and the 308 system only represents
about 15,000 of those people. The CBDG money is used for low cost housing and
loans to help people stay in their homes. It is used for training and helping people
get jobs. He also mentioned the grant writer who brings in millions of federal
dollars that are used on the whole targeted area not just the 308.
Mr. Callahan asked if we build a treatment plant and go for a new system will it be
metered. The answer was yes. He said he was concerned about what could then
happen to the rates and said he would prefer to leave it like it is with the old
system.
Roy Robeck,'3202 Summitview Avenue, commented that he has a large lot with a
small yard and a large driveway and roof that he "irrigates" now. He asked, under
Alternative #2, would that be $9.40 every two months and was told yes. He asked
how sewer would be affected. Dave Brown, Water and Irrigation Engineer,
explained that Mr. Roebeck was not in the 308 system and only the 308 would be
converted to drinking water. He then explained the method used to eliminate a
raise in sewer for those in the 308 system if they converted to drinking water.
Bob Whitney, 308 North 21 Avenue, said he would like to see CBDG funds used
to enhance the irrigation system for the entire city rather than just a locale within
the city. He suggests the city put as much effort as they can into a single system.
He would like to see a single system defined and the cost spread over a larger
area. He commented that Alternatives #2 and #3 do not set us on the right course
for the future.
3
308
ADJOURNED MEETING — FEBRUARY 18, 2003
A gentleman named Ernesto, 606 South 12 Avenue, asked for clarification on
costs between Alternative #1 and Alternative #2. He said he was under the
impression that Council was pushing Alternative #2 and he felt the majority of the
people who lived in the 308 System were Chicano /Latino who don't have the funds
to pay for Alternative #2. Dave Brown explained that under Alternative #2 in the
308 System they would pay an additional $56.40 a year plus the cost of domestic
'water used for irrigation. On a 7,133 square foot lot, their water plus the $56.40
would be $192.10 per year. He then explained that in Alternative #1, on top of your
irrigation bill for a 7,700 square foot lot, you will pay almost $200 more a year.
Ernesto was concerned that if the water used for irrigation became metered,
people in the east side won't irrigate their lawns and the property values would
diminish.
Council Member Barnett explained that an irrigation bill under Alternative #1 would
go up from $150.92 to about $347.27, an addition of $196.35. But, under
Alternative #2 it would only increase between $40 and $55. Council Member
Puccinelli mentioned that the people on the west side who don't belong to any
irrigation system will also be paying $56.40 a year to help pay for a new water
plant.
When asked, Ernesto said he would prefer Alternative #1.
Daniel Miller, 1419 McKinley Avenue, is concerned about the increasing costs of
• water and sewer. He then spoke about the effect of annexing new areas and
adding them to the city water system. It was explained that annexations in West
Valley would not increase the number of irrigation customers as they would be
utilizing Nob Hill Water. Mr. Calvin clarified that the Nob Hill Water users would be
helping to pay for the conversion in Alternative #2. If Alternative #1 is selected,
those customers won't be affected. Mr. Miller explained that the reason people feel
uneasy about switching to metered water is the demand may be higher than what
is being considered and, if there is a higher demand the value of the water would
increase and, therefore, costs would increase. Whcr as a flat billing ratc on a
Freya Burgstaller, 1507 Belmont Avenue, said she is in support of Alternative #1,
especially since she heard that anybody who receives city water will be billed
under Alternative #2. She said it would be unfair for those people on Yakima water
and sewer to have to pay to convert the other area. She also said she wouldn't
want fluoridation in her irrigation water. She had a problem trusting that the
numbers given wouldn't continue to creep up. She would like a chance to vote for
Alternative #1 for every lot that she owns.
Ron Bonlender, 212 North 7 Street, said that although Alternative #2 looks better
on paper, he lives in the 308 district and would opt for Alternative #1. He
suggested Council and staff need to figure a way to make it affordable to efficiently
maintain and rebuild the system. He said his decision is not driven by dollars and
cents but by what seems to be the right decision.
4
309 •
ADJOURNED MEETING — FEBRUARY 18, 2003
Council Member Mattson said he honestly believes the Council is trying to search
for a solution that benefits the most people over the longest period at the least
cost.
David Gutierrez, 303 West Poplar Avenue, asked how Alternative #2 would
change pressure in the 308 area. Mr. Brown explained the pressure in detail
noting that it would increase because it would be in a different pipeline. He said if
we rebuild the 308 system, the goal is to fix all the leaky pipes so water could come
out the sprinkler. The pressure will not get much more than 30 psi because of the
elevation of the river where we take the water out. He also clarified that the
chlorine in the drinking water would dissipate when it came out of a sprinkler.
Luz Gutierrez, 1424 South 14th Avenue, discussed the CBDG money that pays
the grant writer's salary. She said it is important we look to see if we can hire him
on a general fund salary rather than through CBDG funds. She thinks the irrigation
system is necessary to make Yakima a good place to live and to bring more people
into our downtown area.
Javier Gutierrez, 314 South 3rd Street, said he supports Alternative #1 and agrees
with Council Member Buchanan that we should use a portion of the CBDG funds to
cover a portion of the costs.
Mayor Place advised that we had recently received word that CBDG funds will
probably be cut because of Homeland Security.
Phyllis Musgrove, 414 North 30 Avenue, said she was in favor of Alternative #1.
She asked if Alternative #2 was selected would the pipes be big enough or are we
going to have to replace water lines at an even larger cost. Mr. Brown said for the
purposes of the conversion in Alternative #2 they have looked at hydraulic
modeling of the system to make sure the sizing will work. Ms. Musgrove asked
about the possibility of having to rebuild the water treatment plant. Mr. Brown said
that regardless of whether we elect Alternative #2 or not, we are going to have to
add capacity. Some of the expense in #2 for that additional capacity will be there
anyway. All Alternative #2 does is move the costs rather rapidly. If we don't do
Alternative #2 those costs would be spread out over a longer period of time. They
then discussed metering irrigation usage.
Maria Lopez, 807 Jefferson Avenue, through a translator, expressed her
preference for Alternative #1. Although she sees merit in Alternative #2 she thinks
the fear of the unknown water cost will cause folks to not maintain their yards and
over time it will deteriorate the appearance of the neighborhood..
Nestor Hernandez, 1600 South 73 Avenue, said he was in favor of Alternative #1
and asked to have Alternatives #2 and #3 explained. They were explained again,
in detail.
Alonzo Marquez, 613 North 3rd Street, said he thinks Alternative #1 will be
cheaper in the long run because the other numbers are guesses.
5
310
ADJOURNED MEETING — FEBRUARY 18, 2003
Betty Gaudette, 701 North 6 Street, initiated a discussion on the statistics
previously offered by Council Member Puccinelli on the population of the CBDG
target area versus the 308 Irrigation area. Also discussed were the goals of the
CBDG. Ms. Gaudette strongly voiced her opinion that the money would be better
spent in replacing the 308 irrigation system rather than on social items.
Maud Scott, spoke about the current dual water system and how, if Alternative #2
is selected, it will change to a visual disparity between the east side and other
areas. She then discussed utilizing CBDG money for the irrigation rebuild stating it
was hers, and the original irrigation committee's, opinion that should be done. She
said it was the City's responsibility to supply the water to the land it was intended
for and not use it to enlarge the city. The newcomers should pay if the city grows
rather than the existing people. She supports Alternative #1 because the citizens
have no control under Alternative #2.
• Mayor Place closed the public hearing
3. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: 1 nre 7
UNCIL MEMBER
/ )
COUNCIL MEMBER ' DATE
• ATTEST:
CITY CLERK /MARY PLACE, MAYOR
Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins. An audio and video tape o this meeting are available in the City Clerk's
Office
1
6