Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20121213INFRAMINUTES.pdfINFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MINUTES CITY OF TYBEE ISLAND December 13, 2012 5:00 P.M. ATTENDEES: Paul Wolff, Diane Schleicher, Joe Wilson, Barry Brown, George Reese, Jan Fox, Tom Groover and Angela Hudson. Approve the minutes of the previous meetings – Paul Wolff called the meeting to order; asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting; Tom Groover motioned to approve; Barry Brown seconded. New Business: I. Proposed Reason for Replacing Current AMR System with a New AMR System a. Scope of Services for RFP – George Reese states that the current AMR Company, Datamatic, is failing in support for Firefly replacement. We were told that the company is restructuring due to bankruptcy. Since the restructuring, we have been receiving rebuilt units, as opposed to new ones, prior to the restructuring. The rebuilt units are not holding battery life; they are failing faster than we can get them in; when this system was functioning at 90%, it was great for leak detection, billing and water conservation; we need to purchase a new, more reliable AMR System; the new AMR System must adapt to our existing water meters and billing; it must be able to detect leaks, provide history on usage, and graphs; it must be a complete drive-by AMR Sys tem; there will be a 45 day limit on installation of the AMR System, after notice to proceed; the AMR System must have a 10 year warranty. Paul Wolff states, my recommendation would be to go ahead and get the RFP out there and see what our options are; if we get something that we think we can live with, and they will adapt to our meters and warranty these for 10 years, then we can go for a GEFA loan; do a reference check on the company; are ya’ll okay with making a recommendation to Council to put the RFP out there; Tom Groover and Barry Brown agree. Old Business: I. Report back on any additional information regarding Silver Avenue a. Possible Solution – Request Drainage Easement from Fannies. – Diane Schleicher states that there’s been a big discussion on who owns it; Bubba (attorney) has been kind of leaning on us getting an easement, from Fannies, to work on it; just to do that one little drainage piece; Barry Brown states, that is a “prescriptive easement” right there and I think the City has every right in the world to do what they need to do; they’ve been maintaining it all these years; the homeowners haven’t maintained it; Tom Groover states, that was Jenny’s original argument when she was here; there’s water coming from their gutters (condos), their downspouts, in the middle of the street; Paul Wolff states, just to be safe, let’s get both of them to sign off; their Board of Director surely has the authority to sign off on that; Barry asks Joe Wilson, are you going to spoon a trough down the middle of the road; Joe responds, the road is mounded; there’s slopes to both sides; the water is actually standing at the entrance to the condominiums, across from Fannies; the way I’d have to do it is, come up on Fannies side, drop a grade on it and then do a lateral over there and put another one on their side; it will probably run around $2500, not including labor; the labor is budgeted; Barry asks, should we even do that before we clarify who those roads belong to; you’re going to use taxpayers money to fix a private road; Joe states, what I had was a map of the street from 1929, and it said all of those were private; I haven’t seen from Bubba, or anybody else, that says that; if I do go in there and actually do any kind of work, I’ve actually claimed that road; they can prove that in court; Paul asks, we’ve been maintaining it anyway, haven’t we; Joe replies, I haven’t; Diane states, the point is, if we can get the property owners to say, we do not object to the City working on the road; Jan Fox states, then you have made them the owners; Joe states, what it’s called is a temporary construction easement; they allow me access to go in there and fix their problem; that frees me up saying, this isn’t my property; I’m just coming in here to fix the problem; if we can draw up a temporary construction easement that says we don’t own this road; we’re just coming in here to fix a public safety issue; Paul states, I think it is a public issue; we have water standing in the road which is a health hazard, among other things; Barry states, the thing about it is, after a road has been open like that, to the public, for over 7 years, it belongs to the public; I’ve been to court in the past on a similar situation; I know how it works; Bubba needs to look at that situation, with 7 years of being open, it becomes a public road; we cannot let either property owner, on either side, dominate what we’re doing there; they can have access to the road; but they can’t tell you if you can or cannot work on that road; Joe states, so if I go and do maintenance on that road, I’ve bought it; I was just looking for some kind of documentation from some Council, before ya’ll, that says we accept this road. Barry states, I don’t think you’re going to find that; those roads started being used between Butler and the Strand, for just access to the beach; they were never closed off for a least once a day for a period of 12 months; they become a “prescriptive easement”; in the state of Georgia, if the road is opened more than 7 years, that becomes a “prescriptive easement”, to the general public’s access; Joe states, that’s correct; all I’m asking for, is there somewhere documented that we actually accepted maintenance of that road; the quickest way to do this, so I can get in there to fix it, is with a temporary construction easement; Diane states, Bubba recommended that but said it would be difficult from the condos because of the multi-ownership; Paul asks Barry what he recommends; Barry states, I would like for Bubba to clear this up; let’s find out who owns these roads; unless we go in there and maintain them, and that benefits the taxpayers on this island to take them over, take ownership of them, then that’s what we need to do; until that time comes, I don’t think we need to mess with them until we get the ownership dispute out of the way; Paul states, let’s get Bubba to clear this up, once and for all, before the next meeting; take his suggestions under advisement, and go from there. II. Review Water and Sewer Changes on multiple units with multiple kitchens a. Bed and Breakfasts b. Guest Cottages – Diane Schleicher states, I just want to clarify that as part of our rate structure, for our water/sewer charges, that we have a water/sewer charge, garbage and recycling charge; you don’t have a recycling charge if you are 62 or older and it’s your primary residence; if it’s a secondary unit, you would have a recycling charge; so if you have a guest cottage or a multi unit, our water department goes by that rate structure; they charge you whether you have 2 meters or not; we look at that schedule and we charge a second unit, water & sewer meter charge, garbage and recycling charge; the charges include a mother-in-law suite; some people feel that it’s not fair because they don’t always have their guest cottages occupied; they don’t think they should have to pay that charge; some people elect not to have the second garbage container, because they don’t think they generate enough garbage; the City could be flexible on the garbage and recycling; I don’t know how much that would impact; Paul Wolff states, I think a good ground for compromise would be just that; we do charge 2 water fees, regardless if there’s a separate unit on the property, whether it can be rented or not, as long as they aren’t exceeding the capacity of their garbage cart and recycling cart, then we only charge 1 garbage fee; Diane states, it’s really hard to write ordinances and set rates, that satisfy everyone; Barry Brown states, if you are going to start tampering with these, you’re liable to open up Pandora’s box that you can’t close; you would have taxpayer’s on this island, footing the bill like they’ve been doing, for a lot of these people getting away with this stuff; Paul asks Barry, what do you want to do, leave it the way it is; Barry responds, I agree to leave it the way it is; it is what it is; I’m afraid if you start tampering with it, you’re going to have bigger problems; Paul asks Tom Groover, do you have an opinion on this; Tom replies, not really; Diane states, it’s on the City Council agenda; I was looking for some direction from the Infrastructure Committee because you guys have been so involved in setting the water/sewer rates; eventually we’re going to have to roll up our sleeves and work on the water/sewer rates; if we change it now, it’s really going to effect what you guys are going to face later; Paul states, like I said, I think the only room for compromise is going to be the garbage and recycling carts; I don’t want to mess with the water bills because that’s going to impact everything else all over the island; c. Recommendation to City Council – Paul states, what if, we as a committee, suggest that single family residents that have a mother-in-law unit, that’s not rented, and doesn’t have the potential to be rented, be charged 2 base rates for water/sewer, and only 1 garbage and recycling fee; Barry asks, how are you going to police that; Paul states, like Diane said, there’s people getting away with it all over the island; Barry states, if you leave it alone like it is, and you take more time to study on it, you may come up with some better ideas; Paul states, correct me if I’m wrong, it seems to me, the only reason we have the water/sewer and garbage bills all on one bill, is for simplicity of billing purposes; we’re sending all the bills out on one piece of paper; it’s a matter of taking one item off the bill, for residents who qualify; they would have to come in and pre-qualify; I think they should have to come in and sign an affidavit to the effect that, they have a unit on their property, that they will not rent; and if they do rent it, they understand they will be fined for violating the law; so ya’ll don’t want to reach consensus on that; Barry states, not right now, no; I would like more time to think about it; see what kind of impact it would be on the island; if they don’t allow you access to the inside, then you just say no; if they don’t allow you access to that house, then you just leave it like it is. Paul states, that’s fair enough; but Bubba had an issue with that; we asked him about that after the last meeting; his email said that we can’t physically go into a residence to inspect it; we can’t demand access; I think the best thing we can do for this is, let these people come in one at a time, if they want us to waive their garbage and recycling fee for the second unit; if that’s what they want then they will have to allow access to the property and/or, sign an affidavit to the effect that you will not rent it out; having reached no consensus, let’s move on to the next item. III. Internal City Policies for Notification for Water Cut-offs a. Notice of cut off policy is on the front of the water bill – Diane Schleicher states, people don’t read this. b. Recent Notice was given on the back of the water bill (newsletter) – Diane states that we are trying to get caught up with billing. Angela Hudson states, when people are being cut off, they’re not being cut off consistently; they are months behind; not like a month or two; several months behind; we need to be trying to follow the ordinance; people have up to the 20th to pay their bill; we’re still giving them 5 days before we cut off. c. Water Department personnel leave hand tag notices on doors of property who are subject to cut off d. Often property owners and/or occupants turn the property back on with a hand tool when it is turned off due to no-payment e. In December, city staff locked the meters, as well as, turned off the water to avoid this situation. – Diane states, this was the first time we locked meters; I was out of town; right before I left town, we had a property owner that rented out to a tenant; we had the $200 deposit; we’ve been turning off this one tenant’s water, who wasn’t paying; we’d turn it off; he’d turn it back on; he had a $700 water bill when he was stiffing her for the rent and leaving town; so she only had the $200 deposit to put against the water bill; she was left with a $500 water bill; she came in really angry with us, states, you have my deposit; what’s the policy? Staff told her that we had been turning the water off; the tenant had been turning it back on; so to avoid this situation again, staff decided to start using locks; so that’s how the locks came into play. f. In January and in the future, city staff will mail a post card to customers who are subject to cut offs prior to turning off the water and locking the meters. – Diane Schleicher states, in the future, we’re going to come up with a post card system; I think we should. George Reese states, instead of going through all that, why can’t we just put the door hangers up; it would cost less than the postage to send out these cards; you’re talking about a cut list; are you going to send these out to every person on the cut list; that’s what I’m asking you. Barry Brown states, years ago this was a City Marshall issue; he was given a list to address these people, face to face, and tell them they’re going to be cut off; those things he’s putting out right now is against our own ordinance. Paul Wolff states, not if it’s from the City; we’re exempt from the hand-bill ordinance. George states, it’s going to cost us $1300/month. Paul states, I don’t even want to think about sending out post cards; what I would like to suggest, tell me if this is workable, and I think it will be far less than post cards, what I was thinking is, on the 21st, if the bill isn’t paid, somebody puts a door hanger on, saying, your water will be cut off on the 1st of the next month, if this bill is not paid; when that next bill goes out, it’s got the late fee and the cut off fee. Angela Hudson states, the system is going to do that; the system (Incode) is automated; by the 25th, if that bill is not paid, the system will generate that late fee. Diane states, our cut off fee is $35, and we haven’t been charging that; right now we have a $200 deposit for residents and $500 if you’re a business; I want ya’ll to think about this and let me know in the future, what you think; should we say that if someone is cut off 2 times in an annually year, that in order to get cut back on, they would have to put a deposit down. Jan Fox states, if that’s the case, instead of charging the $200, why don’t you charge them 3 months of their usage so that you’re ahead of them; you’re going to have heavy users and really light users. Paul and Angela agree that that’s a good idea. Paul states, plan B, how about we put the door hangers up on the 21st, if it’s not paid, and cut it off on the 1st of the next month, period. Diane states, I think the list is getting smaller; we created our own monster because what happened was, we would shut if off, they would turn it on; we just played a game. Tom Groover states, we have a very well written ordinance that tells you exactly how to handle this; why don’t we just follow it; we haven’t been following it. Paul states, my point is, for somebody that might have made an honest mistake, and not paid their bill, give them a warning; put a door hanger on there, 5 days before it’s going to be cut off. Barry states, if you raise the penalty for not paying on time, you will get more of their attention; instead of $15, make it $35-$40; you will get their attention faster. Angela states that in Union City, on the 25th, the cut off day, we waited until 10:00; if we received any payments, we posted them; then we ran the cut off list and sent people out to cut them off; we didn’t “warn” them; they knew when they were to come in and pay their bill; if they were cut off, they would have to pay a $15 late fee, as well as a $35 reconnect fee, in addition to paying their bill; all of my staff and I think George’s staff too, all we want is some directives on what it is that we need to do, put it in the ordinance, so we can follow it and be consistent with it. Paul states, I’m not faulting anybody in Finance or City Management; I know you’re doing what the ordinance says to do; I’m just thinking from a public relations perspective, I would personally like to see us give them maybe a 5 day window, after we know that they should be cut off; if you’re going out there on the 25th and cutting it off, then fine; if the bill is due on the 20th and is not paid by the 21st, then somebody, whether it’s the City Marshall, somebody from the water department, or whoever, puts a door hanger on there that says your water will be cut off on the 25th, if this bill isn’t paid; we’ve already agreed that we want to lock those that don’t pay. Tom states, I would be willing to bet you, that if we follow the same route that we followed the last time, lock the water on the 27th, that list will be a lot smaller than it was last month, and it will continue to go down. Paul states, I agree, but I would still like to give them a warning. Diane states, we’re in a small community; we know most of our neighbors; we need to give some sort of notice. Paul asks, are you guys cool with the door hanger on the 21st and then cut off on the 25th; if that’s okay with the administration. Diane states, I’ll confirm with Bubba that we’re not breaking the law. IV. HISTORIC BUTLER AVENUE TE GRANT - HGBD A. Project Status Update – Pre-Construction Meeting was held on Thursday, December 14, 2012 at City Hall – Paul Wolff states, one thing that come up at the meeting was a suggestion that Chantel, Diane or someone to go down there to every business owner, whose impacted at all, with the plat, showing them what’s going to be happening, and have them sign off on their piece of property; whether they agree with it or not, just have them sign so we have a record that they were made aware of what’s going on; Paul asks if there’s any other business. Joe Wilson states, I have one thing to bring to your attention; I talked to Aletha, the account representative for Georgia Power for this island; I asked for an energy audit on this island, because after the upgrade, I don’t think it’s accurate what they’re charging us for all of our street lights; she’s already found numerous discrepancies; we’re paying for people’s lights going into their yard; some of these poles in the backyard’s of these people; I will know that in probably about 2 weeks; I will pass the information along to Diane and she can inform you; It hasn’t been done out here, that I can find, in a long time; I would like to make sure that we’re actually paying for what we’re getting, and not paying for other people’s light poles. With no further business to discuss, Barry Brown motioned to adjourn; Tom Groover seconded. A quorum of city council members may be present which would constitute a meeting. Respectfully submitted by Karen Reese on 01-07-13