Minutes of Previous DiscussionsMeridian City Council Meeting
February 26, 2002
Page 17 of 39
Corrie: Any other questions, Council? Thank you, Gary.
4 Water & Sewer Rates Update:
Smith: Thank you. Next item we have is water and sewer rates update. Brad has
finished his draft of the water and sewer rate structure. We have passed that off to J-U-
B to do an independent analysis of Brad's methods. We wanted to make sure that it's a
reasonable approach to what we want to do. We haven't received word back from J-U-B
yet and honestly that hand off was just accomplished at the end of last week. I am not
sure what their timing will be to get an answer back to us. They said they would hop
right on it and get an answer as quick as they can. I think Brad has previously passed
out some draft information to yOu on the rates. We just wanted to be sure before we
brought back a final proposal that we had another set of eyes look it over. Either agree
or disagree and if so, why. That is where we are on that subject. We very very close to
bringing something to you. Do you have any questions on that item?
Bird: I have none Mayor.
De Weerd: I have none.
5 Trunk line Assessment Fees Update:
Water Service on North Locust Grove Road North of Vienna
Woods Subdivision:
Smith: Item number five, trunk line assessment fees update. We don't have an update
for you. We are where we were last time this subject came before you. We have just
been flooded with work projects and so I don't have any good news to report on that
item. I don't know whether Brad has anything he can lend to that item or not. He said
no. The next item I have, item number six is an issue that I wanted to discuss with you
concerning a request for comments we received from Ada County Development
Services. There is a project out on North Locust Grove Road that is north of Vienna
Woods. It is in the proposed Westborough Subdivision that came before you at the last
Council meeting requesting sewer service. This is - this project is called Valley Light
Community Church. I read on their application to Ada County that sewage disposal
would be via septic tank and onsite drain field. Water supply would be via municipal,
quote, from Chinden Boulevard - actually it didn't say from Chinden Boulevard, it said
municipal. As you know there is a water line on Chinden on the north side of Chinden
Boulevard that is owed and operated by United Water. Our existing water main serving
Vienna Woods Subdivision is on Locust Grove Road approximately 2100 feet south of
this project site. We are estimating approximately 35 dollars per linear foot to install a
twelve-inch diameter water line this distance. That is
$73, 500. As you recall several years ago we made a flying extension of a water line in
Ustick Road from Summerfield Subdivision east to the proposed Summers Funeral
Home, which is on the south side of Ustick, east of Eagle Road. We crossed under
Eagle Road with a boring operation and figuratively speaking our backhoes, from our
contractor - bucket from a backhoe touched the bucket of the backhoe from United
Water as they were coming from the east, installing water for the subdivision on the
north side of Ustick Road. It was the feeling of the Council at that time that we needed
Meridian City Council Re_~ular Workshop March 12, 2002
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meddian City Council was called to order at
6:30 P.M. by Council President De Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, and Bill Nary.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Brad Watson, Gary Smith, Mike Worley, and Will Berg.
Roll Call: X
X
Tammy deWeerd
Bill Nary
X
X Cherie McCandless
X Keith Bird
Mayor Robert Corrie
De Weerd: I will go ahead and open the City Council strategic planning session for
March 12,2002 and welcome you all here and ask the City Clerk to do roll call.
Issue #1
Written Updates:
~ Update on 56 Acre Park (Tom Kuntz)
~ Trunk Line Assessment Fees Update
~ Water and Sewer Rates Amendment Update
De Weerd: Okay Council, we have an agenda in front of you, written updates we haven't
gotten any written updates. I imagine that will be addressed in the different issues. Is
that correct?
Watson: President de Weerd, I have some here. They were printed out at 5:30 tonight
and I can pass them out now or tie them into something else. Whichever you prefer.
De Weerd: Go ahead and pass them out. If Council has any questions about them later
we can address that.
Watson: Thank you.
Issue #2 Discussion with Meridian School District
De Weerd: We do have on issue No. 5 the Meridian Police, have a presentation with
their Canine squads. They have asked that that be bumped up on the agenda. I hope
the agenda items before them don't have any objections to that.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: Remember who is standing behind you.
(inaudible discussion amongst staff)
De Weerd: And if you don't mind, we'll move issue no. 5 up on the agenda.
City of Meridian
Public Works Dept.
Memo
F EcCrv¢D
MAR ! 2 2002
CITY OF 3 ERIDL N
To: Mayor Corrie, Council President de Weerd, Council Members
From: Brad Watson, P.E. ~
CC: File, Gary Smith, PE, City Clerk
Date: 3/12/2002
Re: Agenda Items for March 12 City Council Meeting
Following is a brief update of the Public Works related items in Issue #1 on the March 12
Strategic Planning Session/Workshop.
Issue #1: Trunk Line Assessment Fee Update/Water & Sewer Rates Amendment Update
The water and sewer rate update study and calculations we prepared were transmitted to
JUB Engineers for an independent review the week of February 29. They have provided
preliminary comments (mostly favorable).
The rates we submitted to JUB Engineers reflect a minimal water rate increase but a
substantial sewer rate increase. The sewer rate increase proposal we will ultimately provide
to City Council for recommendation will include four options from 0% increase to 100% of the
calculated increase necessary to fully fund on-going operations and maintenance. Each of
those sewer rate increase options will also include the projected operations and maintenance
budget deficit
JUB Engineers has requested a meeting with us next week to go over the water and sewer
assessment fee model. The previous draft fee model developed in-house appears to differ
substantially in methodology from Boise City's. We will decide at that meeting what form of
fee calculation methodology we will recommend to City Council.
Issue #7: Ten Mile Interchan.qe Sewer Study
JUB Engineers provided a "draft" final copy of the Ten Mile
Interchange Sewer Study to us on March 8. This edition of the
report includes everything that has previously been presented to,
· Page 1
Br~ W~mon, P.E.
c~ ~.~
M~dim Public Wod~ I~
660 E. War. tower ~ Su~ 2~
M~ I~ ~2
(208) 898-5500
Fax. (208) 88%1297
watsonh~.nmidian, id. us
and discussed, with Mayor and Council. The only addition to the final report is the executive
summary which summarizes the Mayor's and Coundl's discussions regarding a preferred
alternative. Our understanding is that the preferred alternative is:
Construction of the Ten Mile Diversion Trunk that would serve the area
around Ten Mile Creek and the general area of the intersection of Franklin
and Ten Mile Roads.
Construction of the Black Cat Trunk from a "semi-" permanent lift station on
Black Cat Road south of Cherry Lane to 1-84. This trunk would serve
properties south of Franklin Road and west of Ten Mile Road
We also outlined an additional scope of services with JUB Engineers last Fdday that involves
property owner contact in the affected areas. JUB's public involvement person will be
gathering information from the property owners in the following three main categories:
1. Ideological support of project
2. Potential financial participation in project
3. Willingness to grant easements where applicable.
',iT
We asked JUB Engineers to do this work an(~l'provide a summary to us by mid-April in order
for us to prepare proper budgets for this project if the City Council deems it appropriate.
· Page 2
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 25
Issue #6 Discussion of Water and Sewer Rates (B. Watson and G. Smith) -
De Weerd: Okay. Gary is going to stay with Brad and us on the water and sewer rates.
Smith: Thank you Madam President, Council. Brad is giving you a packet of
information that he has generated for upgrade to our water sewer rates. I'll just turn the
time over to Brad so he can run through this with you.
Watson: Madam President, Council Members. I think we've gone through this before
last fall. Councilman Nary wasn't here to get debriefed on this. I don't remember.
There's a little narrative there towards the front that sort of sums up what's been going
on. These haven't been updated since the fall of 96. What I've done is taken the same
methodology basically as JUB used when they updated those in 96. Although the
calculations are in a lot more detail than what had used back then, the availability of
visual information (inaudible). You'll see some spreadsheets kind of buried in the
packet there. There's just a huge quantity of numbers that we probably don't really
want to wade through except for maybe the bottom line. If there's any questions here
as I'm rattling on please interrupt me. I began with the water system.
Smith:' Brad, I just wonder if anybody would be interested or understands the premise
upon which these have been determined versus calculated. It's different than what the
existing basis of calculations is as far as (inaudible).
Watson: I was going to kind of get to that.
Smith: Oh, I'm sorry.
Watson: The calculation sheet. There's a sheet in there labeled water. (Inaudible).
What we've done just boils this down to the essence I guess is separated out
administration costs versus operation and maintenance costs. The admin costs are
personnel that aren't involved in day-to-day operations, management, some support
clerical. There are some other things and the finance department helped me with those.
The major changes I have written in that narrative is that the administration becomes
the biggest (inaudible). Whereas the old system, or the existing system, the base fee
included administration charge plus 4,000 gallons versus 4,000 gallons of usage. Your
bill is admin charge plus the commodity charge. The commodity charge is the cost per
thousand gallons. That's what we've been using for the base, or the minimum billing.
I've taken that out of here and just gone to a base admin fee. That's simply the total
annual admin costs divided by the number of accounts, divided by 12 months. You can
see 584,000 in bold up there in line 13, divide that by the projected equivalent users,
14,000. That goes down to line 49, down to 3.48 dollars. That will become a minimum
water bill for everybody. If you use zero, that's what your bill is. (Inaudible) is that you
get billed for each and every thousand that you use. If you don't use any, you don't get
billed. If you use 1,000, then you're billed this 98 cents down here on line 50. What this
does, if you'll look on I think three or two pages later there's a table showing the water
bills at various usage levels. For the most part, the water bills will go down but there's a
small band in there from 4,000 to 7,000 gallons per month (inaudible). The actual
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 26
commodity charge or cost per thousand gallons would go from 123 down to 98 cents
per thousand. The administration fee was buried in the 1996 base fee, is significantly
smaller than the 3.48 dollars we're proposing now. There are a couple reasons for that.
Administration was defined a lot differently in 96. There's a lot more things thrown into it
now plus there's a lot more administrative personnel I guess. (Inaudible).
De Weerd: Brad, I see how it would effect residentially but how does this effect
commercial?
Watson: Right now commercial accounts, when they're constructed they are assessed
an equivalent number of residential units. The narrative that I have in here has an
example on the second page. It talks about a fictitious commercial building that was
assessed five ERUs. That's used for two things. One to calculate assessment fees
hook up fees but it also stays with the life of that building and (inaudible). A
reassessment could be done at a later date. If they're at five ERUs, they're charged five
times that (inaudible) regardless of their actual (inaudible). It has become a real
frustration I think (inaudible) to try to track those and explain them.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Watson: If the tenants change or there's an addition to the building, then it's
reassessed. New minimums are plugged into their billing. The new system would
eliminate all that. They would just be charged and admin fee (inaudible) and the
number of equivalent residential units they were assessed at when they were
constructed or remodeled or changed tenants.
De Weerd: So, you have simplified at least explaining how their billing works?
Watson: And simplified the billing process that goes out.
De Weerd: So, some of our main users, I think Jabil (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: You probably don't want to be number one in that category.
Nary: No.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: Is this going to be a significant hit to the higher users?
Watson: No in fact, if you look down at the tabulation the bill actually goes down.
Bird: From 1200 to 900 (inaudible).
De Weerd: So, you don't want to grandfather --
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 27
Bird: No, I don't think you want to be grandfathered there.
Watson: No. I think the. main benefits to this system in addition to the simplicity in
administering it is the very Iow volumes that a single person in an apartment or town
homes or senior citizens, their bill would go down.
De Weerd: I think it will significantly help the single person household and I see
(inaudible).
Watson: There was a little concern since these are going down that there would be
some lost revenue. There's another sheet in here if you're interested. It calculates out
the revenue, the revenue projection based on these new fees (inaudible) a 25,000-
dollar surplus estimated. (Inaudible) that's really, really close. It's really sensitive. It
fluctuates a lot.
Nary: Madam President.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary:
Nary: I think this looks like a good and efficient system, Bred. I really think (inaudible).
I'm wondering if nothing more than a response and I'm thinking of this editorial that was
in our official newspaper a couple days ago. Do we need to respond to the people that
are going to say I've already paid it? You guys have been charging me a lot more than
what you're charging now because you're calculations were based on a standard and
I've been overpaying? Is there a response that we have for that? I'm thinking the other
day I read an editorial that basically in Boise one of the developers there are saying I've
already paid for this bridge three times over so I'm not going to pay for it anymore. Is
somebody going to make that claim that they've already overpaid us two or three times
over and now, we owe them some credit? In that sense, there is a surplus of what is --
that's really a pretty small, I hate to say insignificant but it's a pretty small surplus when
you're talking these large numbers. Is somebody going to believe we owe them at least
some sort of credit back? If we don't then I just think we need to have some thing to
respond with.
Watson: Nobody has paid these fees until they have actually consumed the water. If
you're talking about a fete decrease, they've been overpaying the last -
Nary: Right. I mean that's what it looks like to me. I mean, I don't see anybody would
complain going forward because it looks -- it does make some sense. Secondarily it
doesn't decrease for some of these folks, especially the higher end users. It makes it a
little -
***End Of Side Two***
Nary: Maybe that's the case. Just so it (inaudible) what Rick said was that the
(inaudible) is what they were following. That's fine. I just, I guess would anticipate
since I've seen that a lot lately in the community of people perceiving that there's some
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 28
credit owed or there's some response back that at least we have to be able to answer
that to somebody that there really isn't a credit of some sort.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols. (Inaudible)
Nichols: Councilman Nary. Just a couple-
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nichols: -- let the record reflect I waited for the tape. Just a couple points in terms of
having (inaudible). One is I think Brad is going to talk to us about sewer rates also and
we're going to see that the sewer rates are not as high as they should be (inaudible).
An argUment can be made they may not have been enough on sewer but that was
somehow offset (inaudible). I think the real answer is any time we do a rate increase
that's more than five percent we have to come before the public for a hearing and
present the rationale basis and all of those things in it. We've done that. We've
satisfied State Statute, City Code. We can proceed to make these charges. I think that
you also have to look at it in terms of the city is not really making money off this. We
haven't built up a huge surplus in water fund as a result of these charges. We're
satisfying the statutory requirement and we try to charge the least amount of cost of
these utilities. There may be the one user an argument that there's a refund that they
were over charged. Then another user, the same argument could be made that they
should have been paying us more. It's just one of those things where it never works out
perfectly but you certainly want to continue to work on it and try to make it better
(inaudible).
Nary: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay.
Watson: Just real quick now on the water, that little narrative. It just sort of sums up
why I think water volume charge has gone down. (Inaudible) the quantity of water we're
selling has increased faster than we (inaudible). It's gone down. The sewer on the
other hand is a different -- we've gone through the same exercise (inaudible). I would
like to mention that I have given this to both JUB Engineers for review and met with the
Finance Department and satisfied with the methodology. We've done the same thing
with sewer. The calculated increase is fairly significant. This is -- if I could just pass
these down. This is a spreadsheet that I would like to get in the packets last week that
shows the sewer billing for different levels. The base administration fee for sewer would
be the 4.07 dollars. The commodity charge per thousand gallons would be increased
from 260 to 278. An eight cents difference which the service doesn't seem significant
but if you'll look in that table below at the most common billing categories for up to
maybe 10,000 gallons per month the overall increase is (inaudible)
Bird: 19 percent.
Watson: (Inaudible) 29 percent.
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 29
Bird: Yes that's up in your three to four. Then you've got your 25, 22.
Watson: The fourth column is my attempt to rationalize this a little bit. I was trying to
employee it to an annual increase but even then, there are high fours (inaudible). Third,
fourth and fifth groupings show different scenarios of keeping that administration charge
the same 407 but increasing the amount of increase (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Watson: Decreasing the amount of increase on the commodity charge all the way down
to just keeping it the same as it is existing. Even then, you're still seeing some percent
increases of 20 percent range.
Bird: Madam Chairman.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Brad, why is this in the sewer, why is this -- is our cost per gallon to process this
and everything gone up that much?
Watson: Well, I think there are a variety of reasons. As opposed to water where we
just get to bill on every gallon we run through the meter, sewer is based on the winter
average. The winter average is (inaudible) have not increased (inaudible) but, winter
the increase (inaudible). I guess that's on the revenue side. On the cost side, we just
had -- we've done a lot of construction out there at the plant in the last six years and
there's a lot more operators than when I first came in. I came in 96. This was -- the last
increase was done six or seven weeks later. I don't even know. We maybe had a
dozen people out there at the time. I think we have almost, close to 30 employees now
including a swing shift. We operate 20 hours a day. We have some state of the art
equipment that we didn't have. We've added a lot of maintenance programs to the
collection system and a lot more lift stations. I think there were four or five lift stations
when I got here. There are over a dozen now. There's -
Bird: Brad, I understand the thing. The thing that really jumps out at me is just the
increase for the average consumption for the sewer consumption is very, very high.
This is what I've been saying for four years is we need -- these fees have got to be
looked at every year. You know, we're going to have a -- you might give them back
some on your water but I guarantee there's going to be guys in here thumping on us
when you start putting a 20 percent increase on their sewer. I think we need to go back
and look at some stuff and dig into the -- I don't know. You're fastest growth was
between 94 and 96 as far as your actual growth in building permits if I'm not right.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: I just -- this percent just jumps out at me and -- I mean, you know Brad we're
going from 29 to you know 29 percent it's -- it's certainly not anybody's fault. It's just the
fact that we have neglected to do this on a yearly basis at all our fees. It's just not the
water and sewer fees.
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 30
De Weerd: Keith, I think you're going to see increase continue. The DEQ regulations, a
lot of the regulations are coming down the read. How things are going to have to
tighten up and the technology that the City is going to have to acquire to meet those
new regulations. It will only go up. An annual review of these rates will become
mandatory. That it's not such a great hit all at one time. I think what I hear being
preposed is we can't even try and hit it all at one time. We need to find methodology to
start bringing it up to speed as well as capturing the increased cost in looking at the
requirements further down the road. Is that correct?
Watson: I think so. That's why I previded several different options to you. Gary and I
both looked at that, what we calculated the increase to be (inaudible). I've also gone
threugh some scenarios at each one of those increase rates to calculate what the deficit
would be on the operation maintenance side of things. If we don't do anything, the
projected deficit is about 340,000 dollars.
De Weerd: It's got to stop raining. It's raining on my house.
Bird: (Inaudible)
De Weerd: I don't have the reof paper up yet.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nary: Madam President while Brad is looking at one thing. Maybe this is just my own
ignorance. Obviously, I know you have to calculate these fees differently. Is there any
relationship to this table for the water billing versus the table for the sewer billing?
They're broken into the same categories but they're not - there isn't a relationship, right?
The 3,000 to 4,000 range of quantity of water usage doesn't relate to the 3,000 to 4,000
range of sewer does it? I mean you could use more water in theory. You could use
more water than sewer. There isn't a relationship there is there or is it fairly close?
Watson: Technically, in the winter they're assumed to be Pretty much the same.
Nary: Because I guess to follow a little what Councilman Bird was saying. You know
when you look at the both of them together other than the people at the 3,000 to 4,000
levels, which has a 14 percent increase in water and a 29 percent increase of sewer.
Other than that particular level most of the water rates have the same, corresponding
amount is lower. If you had to take -- if there is a relationship there that is reasonable --
I guess to me, you know just as a homeowner I don't get only a water bill I get the water
and sewer bill together. If somebody told me one part of it went up 29 percent,
otherwise we're prebably further down the list. One part of it went up 15 percent but the
other part of it went down 11 percent I prebably wouldn't loose a lot of sleep over that.
It isn't -- you know the table isn't presented like that. I didn't know if there is a
relationship way to show that to folks because I would be just like Councilman Bird said.
If somebody told me I went up 29 percent, I might not hear anything else but I would
want to know -
Meridian City Council Workshop
Apdl 9, 2002
Page 31
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nary: But if I found out that actually another 10 percent of it was offset the other
direction on the water then it may not get me as excited like I said at that level though --
that 3,000 level I looked at this. Unfortunately a Iow end user, which is kind of what, you
talked about here is really getting a pretty good hit which is very unfortunate. Again, I
think all the calculations make sense but that's very unfortunate because you're talking
about like you talked about here some offices, seniors, people that are - single person
residents. You know those types of things that really are fairly Iow end users are getting
a real significant percentage increase. Although, I mean when you look at numbers one
of them is 4.00 dollars. I mean, it's not really that huge dollar amount but it may be to
someone on a fixed income.
Bird: Yes, 285 dollars a month from social security like some of these poor people are
doing --
Nary: 4.00 dollars-
Bird: -- 4.00 dollars is a lot of money.
Nary: It is a lot of money but I didn't know if there is a way to do that so that way -- is
that a table that I just --
Watson: There is a table that combines both of them.
Nary: Oh.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: We were just numbered to death.
Nary: Like I said I might have just missed that.
Watson: I think it's towards the front. I think I tried to make that the summary sheet.
Nary: Because that way I think at least people would -- might at least -
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nary: Thank you. I just missed that.
De Weerd: Well, he's just now trying to show the differences in what he did to the net
result.
Watson: This lists both water and sewer but their grouping of numbers has a combined,
existing combined calculated and still they're (inaudible).
De Weerd: Is there a way that you can phase that in?
Meddian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 32
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: Mr. Berg.
Berg: Thank you Madam President. Gary can correct me if I'm wrong, but when we
originally, a few years back were looking at hookup fees, we didn't take -- the Council
did not take the total percentage that they needed to increase for current standards of
hookup. They decided that they would gradually have a plan and build up to that.
Somewhere you need to do that but there's nothing that says you have to do that. You
just have to get the consequences of not getting the revenues that you need to supply
future improvements.
De Weerd: The down side of that is if you don't constantly review and update you're
going to forget that you're averaging it out over a period of time.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: We'll count on Brad.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: You need to sign a contract.
Watson: I guess so. I guess my only concern would be that I don't think what I've
calculated here is going to remain static a year from now. It will be higher so, we'll be
chasing -
De Weerd: Constantly chasing -
Bird: That's the thing I see. I don't know how we can -- what's the average user the
household user a family of four?. Leslie do you have any idea?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nary: He said the seven to 8,000 is what I thought-
Bird: What?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: How much?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
smith: 7500.
Bird: So, seven to eight?
Meridian City Council Workshop
Apdl 9, 2002
Page 33
Watson: That's a 12 percent increase.
Bird: That's a 12 percent increase.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Howard: That's just for their inside water. That's not (inaudible).
Bird: Well, he's got it calculated in here I think. Don't you Brad?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Watson: We did in the same categories would be in the winter months but in the
summer you could have a water user that's down in the 25,000 range but his sewer is
still being charged down to seven to 8,000.
Bird: Okay. I see what you mean.
Watson: There's too many permutations to show you that.
Bird: Mine is probably like that.
De Weerd: (Inaudible)
Bird: I mean, no mine probably is like that.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: One way to maybe to do this because I was hearing what Brad was saying. If we
were not to authorize such a large increase or try to amortize it over a period of time, we
may always be chasing out tail to get it back. One of the things that we may want to
look at -- we've been talking about this. I know not everyone is a big fan of it but the
bigger concern here is not a smaller user. I guess to me an office building but a smaller
user to me that's a single fixed income person who may not have the ability to absorb
such a cost. What we had looked at a while back on looking at some sort of hardship
sort of program. Rather than always having to calculate this differently and refigure this
all the time, it may make more economic sense to look at these increases and deal with
those but then also look at providing some sort of hardship method so that people who
are going to be hit. As Councilman Bird said if you're on a fixed income of 300 dollars a
month, 4.00 dollars or 5.00 dollars a month really can matter. That might be the
difference between your prescription and not but those are the folks that really need the
assistance. That might be another method to do that so that we're not always having to
sort of chase after this money or refigure it out constantly just to get back to that 24
percent or 19 percent or something like that. Then we would really -- again, it's
something Gary has been working on a while. At least we would be addressing where
we perceive the need to be. Not all 2,000 or 3,000 gallon users really can't absorb that
4.00 dollar cost but there is a percentage of those that can't. That may be a method to
Meddian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 34
deal with it a little bit better and a little bit more where our concerns are rather than keep
trying to constantly re-figuring it (inaudible). That just seems real cumbersome.
De Weerd: Well that would mean get back to the drawing board.
Nary: No, it means you approve -- I mean, we could go forward with this but then also
in conjunction try to figure out some program -
De Weerd: The project-
Nary: -- some project share type of program that we've been looking at anyway that we
would be able to deal with this particular type of thing through that process. That way if
there are people -- because there may be people -- I mean, we really don't know. There
may be people that don't have any concern with that increase. It may not matter to
them. We do have the Public Hearing process as Mr. Nichols said. We have to give
them the opportunity to come and tell us it's really a hardship, it's not a hardship. It's
reasonable or unreasonable. There's a method to deal with that part. I'm just -- I guess
my perception is that trying to amortize that cost over a period of time may mean we're
always playing catch up anyway. Rather than doing that it might be better to attack the
problem on a different avenue by dealing with it in something we've been looking at
least considering and using that method but yet going forward with these increases like
we're talking about because there are people on the Iow end that are getting a huge
decrease, 60 percent, 38 percent. There are people who are benefiting as well. We
can kind of I guess cover both sides of this in the most equitable way we can.
Bird: I think we need to move forward with the Public Hearing. Let's get it going. At the
same time, I would like to see the Public Hearing held on the water line and sewer trunk
fees that will be put onto the deals at the same time. Then we're not -- Then developers
aren't telling us where we can put our sewer and water lines.
De Weerd: Well, that's far enough down the road -- I mean, do you want to hold this up
for that?
Bird: That should be about ready. We've hired somebody to do it, haven't we? The
trunkline fees?
Watson: Well, they're on board but I've been taking all of the data from financing
(inaudible) because you have to take every asset that the city has. That's what I've
been doing for the last week.
Bird: Has Boise got a program we can plug into? They've got the same thing. Their
cost can't be any different than ours to speak of. Their sewer-
Watson: (Inaudible).
Bird: Well, their assets might be a little bit more but their costs come out of there.
Watson: That's how we calculate is based on our assets.
Meridian City Council Workshop
April 9, 2002
Page 35
Bird: How your assets or your - on the assets that you're putting in or that you're
adding to or what?
Watson: The assessment fees that we charge that we presently charge are based on
the value of your assets and remaining capacity. I think to implement any kind of trunk
fee without the benefit of having those calculated you would be looking at just a piece of
the puzzle. It would almost be looking at water bills without the benefit of looking at the
sewer at the same time. What effect it would have on the homeowner. All of those
need to go hand and hand I would think at the same time. That's the way I have
approached it.
Nichols: Madam President.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Madam President, Councilman Bird. I think you have to -- There may be some
guidance in looking at another city's calculation figures and so forth in terms of are you
close to (inaudible) or not. In order to justify these types of fees they have to be based
on your own data.
Bird: I don't have any doubt about that.
Nichols: So, you can kind of double check them and see where you're at just like
(inaudible) different fees and rates that they charge (inaudible). I think Brad is correct in
all those assets have to be factored in (inaudible).
Bird: The thing that I -- We need to have this on board by budget time. Absolutely,
these latecomer fees that we've been charging and stuff are nothing but a joke. Our
bookkeepers have a nightmare with it. By doing this route we can eliminate them but,
we've been working on this for four years that I know of. Anyway, we can go ahead with
this.
De Weerd: Any further comments? Gary or Brad do you have any --
Watson: I would just like to set which number to use in a public notice and (inaudible)
so that Will and I can get together and schedule it (inaudible).
Bird: What's the average number?. We don't have that before us. We don't want to
take -- you're talking about the usage?
Watson: I'm talking about the greatest (inaudible) presented in this table, the base fees.
Bird: Oh.
Watson: The 348 for water, the base fee, plus the 98 percent user charge. The 407 for
sewer and the 278 commodity charge.
Meridian City Council Workshop
Ap~l 9, 2002
Page 36
Bird: 278? That's what you calculated, then that's what's right. I would say that's the
one we use.
Watson: Okay.
Bird: We can go back and prove we calculated it.
De Weerd: Just put your phone number on that notice.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: Your personal one.
Watson: That's why there is so much paper is because I know that at some point I'm
going to have to defend it.
De Weerd: But I mean, when you look at this without the table, you just look at existing
and proposed people aren't going to have any idea how that came about. I mean, I
couldn't tell you use per thousand gallons what I'm currently (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: I'll tell you one thing, Roaring Springs would be happy.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: Man, they're not getting any increase.
De Weerd: Maybe in their sewer they're not.
Bird: They are in their sewer but overall they're not.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Nary: On the high end, it's a net one percent decrease.
De Weerd: Well, at least you'll have one happy camper.
Bird: Yes.
McCandless: Madam President.
De Weerd: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: Reflecting back on what Bill was saying a few minutes ago. I would have
to ask Rick or Leslie if this would be a solution but the people that are having trouble,
the Iow income, could you instigate a level pay? Like maybe, they do with gas and
power?.
MeHdian Ci~ Council Workshop
Apd19,2002
Page 37
Howard: Our software is set up to where it can do a level pay. We can take whichever
month we choose and (inaudible) whether it be (inaudible) or just a certain amount a
month or it could be every other month and average those out. Yes, we could do a level
pay program.
De Weerd: That's excellent.
Nary: That's great.
Bird: Didn't Meridian do that at one time for the summer months?
Howard: Not for water, no.
Bird: Not for the water?.
Howard: No sewer has been like that since I came on (inaudible).
(Inaudible diScussion amongst Council Members)
Howard: That has -- you have to have several people ask for that as well.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
Bird: That's something to definitely look into Gary.
De Weerd: Okay. You'll get with Will and post it for Public Hearing.
Watson: Yes we will. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you Brad and Gary.
De Weerd: Thank you, a lot of work there.
Bird: You and that computer did a lot of work.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council Members)
De Weerd: Well, thank you Leslie and Rick. Thank you for all your help with that.
Issue #7 Discussion of Park Impact Fee (T. Kuntz)
De Weerd: Okay, Issue Number 7 discussion of park impact fee. Mr. Kuntz. Will can
you get that to Anita?
Kuntz: (Inaudible) stand up and do (inaudible).
Bird: I think I need to stand up but I don't think me knees would straighten now.