HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/01/2004 Business Meeting 2 2 4.9
•
BUSINESS MEETING
JUNE 1, 2004 - 7:00 P.M.
YAKIMA CONVENTION CENTER -10 NORTH 8 STREET
1. Roll Call
City Council: Mayor Paul George, presiding, Ron Bonlender, Neil McClure,
Mary Place, Bernard Sims, and Susan Whitman.
Absent: Dave Edler (excused)
Staff: City Manager Zais; City Clerk Roberts; Chris Waarvick,
Director of Public Works; and Linda Watkins, Records Clerk
Yakima County
Commissioners: Ron Gamache, Jim Lewis, and Jesse Palacios
Staff: John Knutson, Surface Water Manager; Carla Ward, Clerk
Union Gap
City Council: Mayor Aubrey Reeves, Council Members Kim Owens, Pat
McDonald, and Toni Webb
2. Joint Public Hearing with Yakima County and City of Union Gap on
legislation creating a stormwater utility
Yakima Mayor Paul George welcomed everyone with a round of introductions.
Also in attendance were:
Bill Moore, Olympia Department of Ecology (DOE)
Tom Tebb, Yakima Department of Ecology
Misha Vakoc, Seattle Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Chris Waarvick, City Public Works Director, introduced the subject by providing
. background information. He noted that the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Phase 11, affecting the smaller communities of under
100,000 census and a density of 1,000 people per square mile, is here. This
means that the'City of Yakima, the urbanized areas of Yakima County, the City of
Union Gap because of its proximity, and the City of Selah, are all part of the
federal register and will be required to comply with NPDES Phase II. He then
spoke about their efforts to mitigate the requirements, i.e., notifying DOE that the
Washington Guidance Document would not work for us. The Eastern Washington
group created an Eastern Washington Guidance document and a model permit
program.
John Knutson, County Surface Water Manager, also gave background information
on the project. He took this opportunity to request the County's Public Hearing be
extended to June 29 The cities and the county have been working together.
since 2002 under an interlocal agreement to share in the cost of the project. The
Endangered Species Act (ESA) components of stormwater recommend the
County implement the stormwater program but at a very reduced intensity
•
250
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - STORMWATER
JUNE 1, 2004
compared to the urban area. The County proposal also takes the regulations in
the Watershed Management Plan into consideration. By implementing NPDES
and ESA components, stormwater recommendations will be taken care of. Mr.
Knutson also spoke about carrying out a program for educating and involving the
public to seek out and eliminate illicit pollutant discharges as part of our permit.
He went into detail on construction site erosion, development and redevelopment,
identification of practices that impact stormwater, e.g. park maintenance, ground
and road maintenance, and looking into how we deal with drywells. He then spoke
about budgets, legal support, permit fees, etc.
Mr. Waarvick said that many people were asking under what authority are we
doing this and what would happen if we didn't comply. He related the results of
Phase I communities that challenged compliance and lost. Phase I communities
were those entities that had populations in excess of 100,000 and had to apply for
NPDES permits in 1995.
In response to questions, Mr. Knutson described how fees will be determined once
the utilities are established. It is generally based on the amount of impervious
surface. They have also proposed using acreage for agricultural type uses, less
impervious surface but intensive land use. They have developed the ERU
(Equivalent Residential Unit) which is the average amount of impervious surface
on a typical residential lot (3600 sq ft) or a rural lot (7200 sq ft). There will be
credits for management of stormwater on site and there may be discounts for
seniors, disabled, and low income families. They will divide the budget by the
number of ERUs in the jurisdiction to figure out a cost per ERU. At full
implementation they expect it will be $4.00 to $4.50 per month. They are trying to
get cost information out now for people to use for budgeting purposes until the bills
are sent out, ideally next year as a line item on property tax.
Union Gap Council Member Pat McDonald asked about discounts for individuals
who have basically no runoff due to their own efforts. Mr. Knutson responded that
if we have folks with no runoff, there would be a 20% reduction. He explained that
the majority of our costs are for regional implementation of pollutant management
along our roads and implementing regional education programs and that every
time there is a discount someone else is burdened because program costs are not
reduced.
Misha Vakoc, EPA, responded to Commissioner Lewis' question on what would be
the impact if the three groups refused compliance. She said the Clean Water Act
has penalties for non - compliance. Bill Moore of DOE explained that in the late
1990's Clark County did not apply for the NPDES permit and were sued by a third
party. The courts found in favor of the third party, and Clark County had to obtain
a permit. It was noted that Phase II does recognize the differences in climate
across the country although Phase I did not.
Mr. Waarvick described the City of Yakima's program. It has a cost of about $2.4
million. The proposal uses no new facilities and uses existing staff although they
are recommending, within the first five years, to increase staff by 10.5 new full time
2
25 1
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - STORMWATER
JUNE 1,'2004
equivalents (FTE). Staff had,,at one time, recommended adding a 10% tax to this
utility that would be dedicated for basic street maintenance. After reviewing the
current deficit of the Street Division's annual budget, approximately $2.8 million, it
was determined that a more robust and comprehensive funding solution would be
required.
An important element of the new stormwater management program will be the
development of a waste site for the disposal of pollutants removed from the catch
basins. Members of the City's Wastewater, Streets, and Stormwater Divisions are
working with the County and the Department of Transportation to develop and
maintain a site that could be used by all three governmental agencies.
Council Member Bonlender started a discussion on the potential of people being
deterred from putting in driveways and sidewalks for fear of getting another ERU.
Mr. Waarvick said those things have been thought about and we have a Surface
Water Engineer, Brett Sheffield, to help people with a strategy to keep their costs
down.
• Mayor George opened the public hearing.
Mike Leita, 4802 Avalanche Avenue, provided written comments prepared after
reviewing the draft ordinance. He highlighted a number of areas of the ordinance,
e.g. civil penalties, definitions, education, and discounts. He summarized by
saying he believes the.fee schedules are excessive and cannot be justified.
Mark Barrett, President of the Yakima County Farm Bureau, claimed the
information has not been distributed in a timely manner. He referred to the flood
control tax on our property taxes and how, as a result, he doesn't understand the
need for the stormwater policy too. He recognizes it is mandated but pointed out
that we are only required to have a policy, not to create a bureaucracy. He
questioned whether there really is a problem in Eastern Washington and stated
that agriculture does not have impervious land.
Jim Morrison, Gleed, questioned the need for this and suggested Yakima County
treat their stormwater as Selah is doing now. He suggested a simple solution
would be sedimentation ponds. He too suggested using the existing flood tax
rather than applying a new tax.
Sandra Swanson, West Valley, emphasized that existing costs for work currently
being done, e.g. street cleaning, should not be put under this utility fee. She
expressed concern about flat fees and about agricultural land. She didn't agree
that compacted gravel should be considered impervious. She also spoke against
having the schools, or any government entity, pay the fee; since the same
taxpayers pay for it anyway.
Walt George, told about his dealings with water quality in the Yakima County
Conservation Program and how the farmers in the lower valley have already
stepped up to meet water quality standards.
3
252
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - STORMWATER
JUNE 1, 2004
Frank Hendrix, 433 Ames Road, said he is an educator and scientist for
Washington State University in the area of water quality. He suggested
removing ESA from the County's proposal as there are already 20 agencies
working on it. In that way, agriculture would not be mandated to be included in
this. He pointed out that the County's proposal does not include the state
lands, the firing center, and the forest service, noting that if it is rurally
mandated, those lands have to help bear the cost. He then commented about
whether the proposal was a tax or a fee.
Tom Bass, Yakima County Cattlemen President, questioned why dry range
land has to be under this program. He discounted the federal mandate and
asked where "our" mandate is.
David Taylor, Moxee, provided written testimony to the Commissioners on
behalf of the County Cattlemen's Association. He said that in his reading of
the statutory citations outlined within the draft ordinance he found direct ties to
the GMA. Before a tax is in place a plan should be in place and that plan
should be in agreement with the Comprehensive Plan, was it? He quoted a
number of RCWs questioning whether they were adhered to when creating this
proposal.
Steve George, representing the Yakima County Dairy Association and the Hop
Growers of Washington, commented that they feel like they were left out of the
process. He said until they are involved they cannot understand it nor have
time to provide input. They wouldn't support the County adopting this on a
short time frame and would like time to interact.
Joe Walsh, Central Washington Homebuilders Association, commented that
both the City's and County's implementation plans include expenditures to
develop a program to train staff engineers and contractors to properly design,
build, and maintain the various best management practices. He suggests that
much of that could be eliminated and thereby reduce the fee structure. Our
local professionals have adequate knowledge and resources to determine best
management practices. Secondly, it is essential that the stormwater utility not
become a clearinghouse for functions such as endangered species recovery.
Leave that with the Yakima Sub Basin Fish and Wildlife Group as they have a
substantial plan already in place. By removing the ESA costs from the County
stormwater utility, the taxpayers fees in years four and five would be reduced
by as much as 20 %.
Craig Rath, 314 North 73 Avenue, owner of Rath Construction, said that this
is troubling to builders and part of what we're setting out to do is just to shield
ourselves from litigation. The potential for erosion control measures would do
nothing more than add another layer of bureaucracy. More dirt and topsoil is
lost due to wind than to rainwater. He asked this group to take the opportunity
to lead the community and look at innovative solutions to this problem and the
ramifications it has on our community.
4
2.53
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - STORMWATER
JUNE 1; 2004
Bill Lover made remarks about government taking advantage of this mandate
to generate up to 20 new positions. He recommended taking advantage of the
talent already in place through training, lateral transfers and promotions rather
than hire additional employees.
Peter Dell, 700 Firing Center Road, said he understands the need to spread
costs to keep the fees as low as possible, but retail business has the option of
raising prices and the final consumer'pays the costs. Unfortunately, the
agricultural base does not have that option. He questioned how can our
farmers afford to pay additional fees for something they probably have nothing
to do with. He doesn't find any basis for this proposed act and asked how can
we enact a fee (tax) to fix a "so called" problem for which the source is yet to
be identified. He finds it hard to believe that the water collected on his property
that goes into his city- approved drywell affects any river, stream, or any
aquifer. It is his belief that the water evaporates. He then spoke about how
there could have been alternatives to curbs and gutters that would have
dissipated the rainwater thus alleviating the problem in the first place. He
asked this group of government leaders to consider the financial impact on all
taxpayers, identify the source of the problem, and do what is right for the
citizens and taxpayers.
Judy Boekholder, Toppenish, agreed with some of the points and noted that
there are a number of agencies, even at the federal level, that have forgotten
common sense and that one size doesn't fit all. She suggested that if we are
really concerned, we could devise a system to test the water on the way in and
on the way out to find out if there really is a problem. If we are going to be
forced into doing it, we have to find the most economical method and not go
overboard.
Wes Hazen, upper Wenas, is a farmer entomologist that supports the
endangered species act and the water quality act. He described several storm
events in the area of Wenas Cemetery and the lake where he observed the
method the County uses to clean out the ditches afterwards. He claimed that
each time there is a storm we end up with more siltation due to the cleaning
method. He also spoke about lack of controls for the Wenas area.
Frank Wesselius, 442 Naches Highway, related a past flooding problem in his
area and how long it took to get fixed. He asked Misha Vakoc, ESA, what the
standard was for putting NPDES in rural areas. Ms. Vakoc responded that
there is no strict obligation to include rural areas in the Stormwater NPDES.
He questioned why the money in the Flood Control program couldn't be used
to determine if there really is a problem.
Commissioner Lewis continued the County's hearing to June 29 at
1:30 p.m. in the basement Hearing Room. He instructed staff to take
the public comments into consideration when preparing material for
the public hearing.
5
254
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - STORMWATER
JUNE 1, 2004
• ' Union Gap Mayor Reeves said they will hold their own hearing but a
date hasn't been set yet
• Yakima Mayor George continued the City's Public hearing but did
not announce a date and time.
3. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY A %#4: /
CO N IL MEM: Pr DATE
c/
COU o 'r MEMBER DATE
ATTEST:
2 � 1
CITY CLERK AUL G. GEORGE, MAYOR
Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins. An audio and videotape of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office
1
6