11/08/1995 - Minutes INTERGOVERNMENTAL< WATER BOARD;MEETING
November 8, 1995
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Scheiderich, John Budihas, Beverly Froude, Paul
Hunt and Peggy Manning
STAFF PRESENT: Ed Wegner, Mike Miller, Randy Volk, Wayne Lowry,
Bill Monahan and Kathy Kaatz
VISITORS PRESENT: Jack Polans, Steve Feldman
1 . Call to Order
The Meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board was called to order at 5:30
p.m.
2. Roll Call
Roll was taken with all members present.
3. Visitor's Comments
Jack Polans stated that he had spoke with Mayor Nicoli and that Mayor Nicoli
had stated that the contract with CH2M Hill had been cancelled with another
consultant being selected. Mr. Polans referred to the minutes from the October
11 meeting beginning on page 2 #5 (In September of 1995, the City Manager
went to the City Council with this information ...). Mr. Polans then questioned
whether the needs of the study had been met and/or when will that be
accomplished? Mr. Polans stated that he also spoke with Mayor Nicoli
regarding water bonds and Obligation bonds versus Revenue Bonds. Mr. Polans
continued to say that he had attended a meeting at Lake Oswego and he would
like to know the status of the IGA between City of Tigard and Lake Oswego?
Mr. Polans continued by reading a portion of a letter which stated that: 1) the
City of Lake Oswego does not want to give up water rights to the City of
Tigard; 2) City of Lake Oswego needs to expand land and water to update
future needs of drinking water; and 3) City of Lake Oswego does not own
present drinking water land? Mr. Polans stated that for financial reasons it was
his opinion that both Cities should implement the Intergovernmental Water
Agreement as soon as possible.
Mr. Polans continued to say that he had requested a meeting with the Mayor
of the City of Lake Oswego and the City Manager. Mr. Polans then asked
Chairperson Schederich if Mr. Lowry could explain to the Board the difference
between Obligation and Revenue bonds? Chair Scheiderich stated that he felt
that the Board knew the difference and if not, Mr. Lowry could make that
distinction at the time of his presentation.
4. Approval of Minutes
A motion was made by Commissioner Hunt to approve the minutes of the
October 11, 1995 meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board. The motion
was seconded by Commissioner Manning and voted upon unanimously.
5. Regional Water Supply Plan - Ed Wegner
Chair Scheiderich stated that he thought it would be appropriate for Mr.
Wegner to address the recent interest in the backing of certain alternatives.
Mr. Wegner began by discussing the proposal made by Commissioner Lindberg
of Portland (1 .5a) that would throw out the Willamette River as a alternative
water source. Mr. Wegner continued by saying that this Board as well, would
have the opportunity to make choices and proposals to this plan. Mr. Wegner
stated that a group of other water providers have stated that they have had
comments/concerns about the Willamette but nothing as strong as the
comments/concerns that Mr. Lindberg is referring to.
Mr. Wegner stated that studies have been done at Wilsonville that has shown
that pure drinking water can be obtained at that site that meets all Federal and
State regulations for drinking water. The RWSP Committee has decided at this
point to leave 1 .5 on the table.
Mr. Wegner stated that a memo was provided that outlined the timetable which
reflects that the Tigard City Council will be shown the video and receive the
comments/concerns of the IWB at the November 21 meeting and
recommendations will be discussed at the December 12 meeting to forward to
the Regional Supply Committee for the final draft. Prior to the final draft of the
RWSP, all participants will have the opportunity to review (final should be
completed by April, 1996).
Mr. Wegner stated that he had provided to the Board the RWSP, the Executive
Summary, 10 most asked questions, summary of comments that were gathered
at the joint meeting in October, comments from the public hearing in
September, 1995 at Tualatin Valley Water District, and the clip on with the
newsletters. This information will provide a glimpse of what comments have
being made within the region.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 2
The Board then began discussion of which key policy values were most
important to them in meeting future water needs? The Commissioners rated
the policy values in order of priority and their comments were as follows:
Commissioner Froude
• Quality of water. Number one priority although, not opposed to the
Willamette completely.
• System Reliability
• Cost
• Efficient use of water
• Environment
• Diversity of Sources
Commissioner Froude stated she was also interested in exploring the two-tier
system (dual pipe system). Gray water used for irrigation and the possible use
of Willamette for irrigation purposes. She also stated that the Plan is a good
start although she is sad about the lack of public interest.
Commissioner Budihas
• Cost
• Water quality
• Efficient use of water
• Diversity of sources
• System Reliability
• Environmental impact
Commissioner Budihas stated that the cost is significant to most and also
mentioned the lack of public interest.
Commissioner Froude mentioned the possibility of mailing out the questionnaire
to help measure the interest in this area and to gain more interest. Ms. Froude
also stated that when talking about regional issues, the public tends to think
that is somewhere or someone else. There is a need to personalize the issue
so they can visualize the impact on them.
Commissioner Manning
• Water quality
• Efficient use of water
• Cost
• Diversity of sources
• System reliability
• Environmental impact
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 3
Commissioner Manning stated that one source that is not being considered is
the young people. A requirement for graduation is the completion of a
community service project which could involve the water issues and the impact
it will have on them and their families. These young people could conduct
interviews. Ms. Manning also mentioned having some focus groups where
people would be given an incentive to come discuss some of these issues or
to create some marketing incentives. She also mentioned the use of
community groups such as Rotary and Kiwannis. Ms. Manning stated the need
to take a step by step approach to 2040 Plan and look at in possibly ten year
increments to establish credibility.
Commissioner Hunt
• Quality of water
• Costs
• System reliability
• Diversity of sources
• Efficient use of water
• Environmental impact
Commissioner Hunt stated that there is a need for a clearer definition of these
issues. Mr. Hunt questioned when talking of water quality, is that when it
comes out of the tap or while in the river? These are the kind of items which
need to be clarified. Mr. Hunt discussed that system reliability is not
necessarily the optimum amount of water, but the needed amount of water.
Mr. Wegner stated that the system reliability would be for drinking water and
the essentials, not for filling swimming pools and irrigation needs.
Commissioner Manning stated that if the Board was going to be rating these
issues collectively, there is a need for a clearer understanding. Ms. Manning
stated that she would change her ratings if the system reliability is for drinking
water and essentials. Mr. Wegner clarified the perimeters of system reliability
to include drinking water and the essentials water service available 365 days
per year, but not for filling pools and irrigation purposes. With this clarification
Ms. Manning changed her rating to reflect System Reliability to be her number
four choice and Diversity of sources to number five. Mr. Budihas also moved
his number four choice to be System Reliability and number five to Diversity of
sources.
Chairperson Scheiderich
• Quality of water
• Efficient use of water/Environmental impact
• Cost
• Reliability
• Diversity of source
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 4
Chairperson Scheiderich reinforced the importance of water quality. Mr.
Scheiderich stated that their is need for more emphasis being placed on the fact
that water is a finite resource and that you cannot sacrifice other things in the
environment to continue to produce more water for consumption. Mr.
Scheiderich stated that he would also like to see more emphasis in the Plan on
education of what conservation can do, a rate structure that encourages
conservation, and building and plumbing code revisions (gray water for
irrigation).
Chair Scheiderich continued that costs, which includes the incentives for
industrial users and the cost of new capacity should be true costs (SDC's).
Mr. Scheiderich talked about the reliability of the system and the effect an
earthquake could have on the system as well as the possibility of introduction
of parasites into the system. He continued by talking about the diversity of
sources and the need to look at all alternatives as a source and the possibility
of looking into why some sources have been ruined and how to reverse that
situation.
Mr. Scheiderich stated that the strategies of the Plan be tighten up or revised
with more emphasis being placed on conservation management against
projected demand. Chair Scheiderich talked about a formal consortium of water
providers and stated that we probably won't see any capital projects of regional
value happen without a regional consortium. He continued by saying that it
was his opinion that capital projects by way of general bonds, revenue bonds,
or raising property taxes would work if the feeling is out there that some of
that capacity will be sold downstream to buy it. Mr. Scheiderich stated that
there is a need to look at what needs to be done and how we can accomplish
those needs. He stated that education with the assistance of the school
district would be beneficial.
Mike Miller calculated the consensus on objectives as follows:
• Quality
• Costs
• Efficient use
• System reliability
• Environmental/Diversity of sources
Mr. Wegner questioned whether the Board would like their individual ratings to
be presented to Council or the combined ratings? The Board stated that they
would like the combined ratings presented to Council and to include their
individual comments, since all the Board members felt similarly.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 5
Commissioner Budihas clarified his vote for cost as number one objective since
it was his assumption that all the water being provided would be quality water.
Mr. Wegner stated that all water supply is required to meet Federal and State
standards.
Mr. Wegner asked the Board what their feelings were on the five strategies in
this plan (Figure ES-2, page ES-28 of the Executive Summary)? Mr. Wegner
stated that all sequences included conservation. Sequence 1 .5 which was the
staff's recommendation included outdoor conservation, South-East (50 mgd)
transmission lines, aquifer storage and recovery, utilization of the Clackamas,
utilization of the Willamette in two phases and South-West transmission. In the
timetable it makes the assumptions that the Barney Reservoir will be brought
on as well as the well fields for Portland being used in the summertime and that
critical needs remediation is taken care of. These phases are progressing with
the construction of the Barney Reservoir, and remediation of well fields to help
meet capacity.
The dates shown are based upon the population data that Metro supplied (new
figures from two months ago). Mr. Wegner discussed the rapid growth in areas
such as Tigard, Wilsonville, Canby, Damascus will skew these figures because
these were averages for the three county areas.
Mr. Wegner discussed how Metro will become involved with the Plan. Metro
was not initially involved in the Plan although they came in at no cost since
they provided the data for the study. Mr. Wegner stated that there has been
a lot of debate on what role Metro will play in the Plan (conservation). Chair
Scheiderich commented on SB 122 in which Cities and Counties are required
to provide a consortium to come up 15-20 year annexations plans and provider
plans. Mr. Wegner stated that through their Charter Metro has been given the
mandate to set up a water supply plan as well as a transportation plan, 2040
plan, although the water providers have stated that they have already begun
the process.
Chair Scheiderich questioned whether Sequence 1 .5 was the staff
recommendation? Mr. Wegner stated that was correct (see Table ES-1 1 , page
ES-33). Mr. Scheiderich stated that his recommendation would be 1 .1 .
Commissioner Manning stated that she appreciated the involvement of Mr.
Wegner and Mr. Miller in this process. Mr. Scheiderich stated that he would
like to see some more of where we are headed from here.
Chair Scheiderich stated that he would be out of town on November 18 and
would be unable to attend the tour of water facilities. The remainder of the
Board members stated that they would be able to attend.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 6
Mr. Polans questioned whether Mr. Monahan would discuss which direction the
plan should be headed? Mr. Scheiderich stated that since this item was not on
the agenda it could be covered by Mr. Polans or the Board Members at another
time. Mr. Polans then questioned whether Mr. Scheiderich had ever been a
member of RUGGO? Chair Scheiderich stated that he was aware of the goals
and objectives and does approved what goes to the City Council.
6. Utility Billing Process - Wayne Lowry
Mr. Lowry began by discussing the memo that was provided to the Board
regarding proposed changes to the Tigard Municipal Code. As background, the
City has always billed for sewer and storm drainage with Unified Sewerage
Agency ordinances and the Tigard Water District was separately billing for
water usage, this process was merged in July of 1994.
After combining these billings for the past year, the Finance Department would
like to adopt some changes to the rules and policies effecting the billing
process. The Tigard Municipal Code section 12.08 includes the City's old
collection process which included turning delinquent sewer accounts to the
County Assessors office for collection. In addition Tigard Municipal Code
section 12.10 includes the Water system Rules, Rates and Regulations, some
of which deal with collection of utility charges. The draft ordinance would
repeal TMC section 12.08, amend TMC 12.10 and establish a new section
12.03 to deal specifically with the billing and collection of the combined utility
charges.
The City of Tigard is currently an agent of Unified Sewerage Agency and in the
Code would like to adopt USA's Ordinances and Resolutions that deal with the
relationship of sewer maintenance collection and fee structure.
Mr. Lowry summarized by saying that they would propose to repeal Tigard
Municipal Code 12.08, amend the Rules, Rates and Regulations Section 12.10
and adopt USA's Ordinances and Resolutions that deal with sewer maintenance
collection and fee structure with the development of section 12.03.
Chair Scheiderich questioned whether there are any areas of the City that as
result of annexation, that would result in Tigard billing for some utilities and not
others? Mr. Lowry stated that the Northeast section of the City is billed for
water by Tualatin Valley Water District and King City, Durham and the
unincorporated outside the City limits are not billed for sewer. Mr. Lowry
stated that they have a separate section of delinquent collection for
sewer/storm only billings (2200 accounts)• Mr. Lowry stated the future
possibility of billing sewer and water for the entire Water District boundaries
and continue to do sewer only for those users within other water districts.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 7
Mr. Lowry then displayed a combined utility timeline as follows:
COMBINED UTILITY TIMELINE
CURRENT (days) PROPOSED (days)
METERS READ 1-3 1-3
BILLS PRINTED 4 4
BILLS MAILED 5 5
DUE DATE 21 21
REMINDERS 42 35
SHUT OFF 57 56
SERVICE DISCONNECT 58 58
The board briefly discussed monthly versus every other month, utility billing which
seems to have become an insignificant issue. Mr. Lowry stated that they still have
been discussing the possibility of reading our own meters versus contracting these
services out. Commissioner Manning stated that the current process does allow a
user to pay their bill in two separate payments.
Commissioner Hunt discussed some comments that he has gotten concerning the
wording on the shut off notices. Commissioner Manning stated the importance for
users to allow the proper amount of time for mailing bills.
Mr. Lowry distributed copies of a sample billing and shut off notice to Board members.
Mr. Lowry discussed the procedures of the billing cycle. Regular bills are mailed on
day 4/5, then if the bill has not been paid on day 42 a "friendly reminder" is sent out.
Currently once a shut off notice is posted at the residence, a customer has only 24
hours to pay prior to their service being disconnected.
Commissioner Budihas commented on placing wording on the "friendly reminder"
billing which states the due date of the bill.
Mr. Lowry stated that what they have proposed is to change the language on the
reminder bills to include "to avoid further collection effort or future termination of your
water service...", and also to send out the reminders a little earlier and to include a
48 hour period prior to shut off.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 8
- Mr. Volk stated that on that 57th day the Water Division may have a crew hang as
many as 50 door hangers (shut off notices) and may only shut off 10-12 users, which
takes additional employee time.
Commissioner Manning stated that the responsibility is on the user/ratepayer to pay
for the water they have consumed.
The Board briefly discussed the liability of shutting off water to a home that has
children in the home. Commissioner Manning also suggested having alternative
information available to provide to users that are in need of assistance.
Mr. Lowry stated that on 12.03 030 Collection Procedures, the change will reflect a
48 hour shut off notice, the additional language that discussed the shut off procedure
and that staff will check mail receipts the day of shut off, and crew members will note
the time the meter is locked or shut off. Mr. Lowry stated in response to a question
from Commissioner Hunt that payment drop off sites are responsible for getting those
payments into the City office.
It was also discussed that the new language will discuss a reconnection charge being
$20.00 with the addition of multi family housing collection procedures.
Mr. Scheiderich questioned the lack of delinquent payment charge. Mr. Lowry stated
they do not charge any interest. Mr. Lowry stated that there is no charge to turn a
users service off, although there is a charge for service reconnection.
In the past there has been no language that discusses the collection procedures for
users that do not have water services (storm/sewer only). The new language will
state that a delinquent account can be turned over to a collection agency, court action
can be taken, the account turned over to the County Assessor's office, or
disconnection of service. The new language will allow the City the authority to
address these collection issues.
SEWER/STORM USA ORDINANCE
IWB/COUNCIL
RECONNECTION DURING BUSINESS HOURS $20.00
AFTER HOURS $30.00
METER DISCONNECTION - BROKEN LOCK $10.00
REMOVAL/RE-INSTALL ACTUAL COSTS
TURNOFF FEES 3%
- RETURNED CHECK $15.00
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 9
Mr. Lowry discussed when there is a meter placed for new construction and it is
destroyed, it will be charged to the contractor. Chair Scheiderich brought up selling
the meters to the Contractor to cover this issue.
The Board discussed billing adjustment process (12.03.060) and the addition of new
language that would allow the following authority to adjust billings.
BILLING;ADJUSTMENTS (12.03.060)
AUTHORITY DOLLAR AMOUNT UP TO
Finance Director $ 50.00
City Administrator 250.00
IWB Board >250.00
The addition of the new language would also state that these waiver could be granted
upon written requests from users and for good cause. This language is separate from
the Rules, Rates and Regulation language that covers leak adjustments. Section
12.070, Customer Appeal Process will cover the process in the case of the user
dissatisfaction with the appeal.
Commissioner Budihas questioned the code that addresses disconnection of service
to a user that could cause health problems or there is small children in the house. Mr.
Wegner stated that the City attorney's office makes sure that the language in this is
not in conflict with language in any other codes, and some of these become health
and family services issue not a billing issue.
Mr. Lowry stated that it is his goal to take these recommendations before the Tigard
City Council within the next month or two.
Commissioner Hunt questioned item (d) under 12.03.060 which states that the
Finance Director may enter into a payment agreement with a customer to facilitate the
payment of delinquent charges up to $10,000. Mr. Lowry stated this would be in the
case of a industrial user and a possible bankruptcy action and would not waive any
fees but only allow for collection of the debt. Commissioner Manning questioned
whether this should be change to reflect this be accomplished by a joint agreement
between the Finance Director and the City Administrator. It was decided this would
be left as is.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 10
The Board continued by discussing the collection of a security deposit after a shutoff
or meter removal, and whether a deposit is required for bad payment history or a prior
bankruptcy user. Chair Scheiderich recommended that the authority be granted to
require deposits with the discretion of the Finance Director. Mr. Lowry stated that a
credit history check is not done at this time.
Chair Schederich had the following recommendations:
• Recommended the addition of an allowance for requirement of a security
deposit;
• a written record be kept of any written waivers that are granted;
• delete the wording that addresses the users obligation to mail within five days
of reading; and
• add dis-incentives for delinquent payments over 10 days.
Commissioner Froude questioned whether users would be notified of these
changes. Mr. Lowry stated that any new charges would be addressed on the
billing.
Commissioner Budihas questioned the returned check charge increased to
$25.00. Chair Scheiderich stated that Ballot Measure 5 states that the charge
cannot exceed the actual costs of providing the service. It was recommended
that Mr. Lowry find out the actual costs on a returned check.
A motion was made to adjourn by Commissioner Manning and was seconded
by Commissioner Hunt and voted upon unanimously.
The next meeting of the IWB will be scheduled for December 13, 1995 and if
not needed will be put off until the first of the year.
6. Director's Report
Mr. Scheiderich stated that there was another issue before the Board for
discussion with the report on preliminary use of the building. Mr. Wegner
stated that this report was furnished as an intermediate report since the agenda
was full. Chair Scheiderich requested some progress on this issue at the next
meeting.
Chair Scheiderich questioned whether a decision needed to be made on the use
of the building for a shelter? Mr. Wegner stated that the Board had given their
approval at the last meeting for this purpose, although the City has prepared
a draft contract, the contract has not been signed at this time.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 11
Commissioner Manning questioned whether Interfaith would be charged to use
the shelter. Mr. Wegner stated that Interfaith had stated previously that they
would be charging users. The Contract does state that if Interfaith charges the
City will receive 50% of the collected charges to offset costs. Commissioner
Hunt clarified this issue by saying that this was not to be a charge, but a
request for donation.
Mr. Wegner stated that included in the information distributed to the Board was
a status report from CH2M Hill. Mr. Wegner also clarified that CH2M Hill is still
the consultant of record since the IWB interviewed them at the last meeting
and agreed to continue their services.
The meeting was adjourned.
Kathy\iwb\1 1-8mtg.min
IWB MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 1995 PAGE 12