Laserfiche WebLink
535 <br />Mr. Schwartz reiterated that the information exists, but may be buried depending <br />536 <br />on the age of the system, type of materials, but not immediately available for a <br />537 <br />city-wide analysis in an efficient manner. <br />538 <br />keeping mains cleaned out. Mr. Schwartz clarified that currently the City is not <br />539 <br />Member Cihacek opined that the question was whether as a utility <br />540 <br />customer/homeowner, would he prefer to pay incrementally for a commodity that <br />541 <br />he may never realize any benefit and to support a long-term program with a <br />542 <br />sinking fund. Member Cihacek noted that, without the benefit of records and <br />543 <br />permit, and code applicability, and only less than 1% of the City's properties <br />544 <br />pulling permits now for this work, it appeared not to be an issue at this time, but <br />545 <br />was foreseen to be in the future, even though that remained an unknown. Member <br />546 <br />Cihacek expressed appreciation for the information from the Finance Department, <br />547 <br />but in order for him to support the City taking on this liability and increasing <br />548 <br />water and sewer base rates to fund that liability, he woul need information on the <br />549 <br />structure and disclosure versus that projected rate increas ember Cihacek <br />550 <br />stated that personally he would accept a rate increase witho at information <br />551 <br />being available, with the monies raised to be used to consoli e current City <br />552 <br />recordkeeping data. XJ* <br />553 <br />554 <br />Member Seigler opined there were too many scenarios where a home wner could <br />555 <br />get the short end of the stick depending on the loca(on of the main, opining that <br />556 <br />he therefore preferred the City assuming liability of the laterals from the property <br />557 <br />line to the main <br />558 <br />559 <br />Member��ed Member Seigler if he was willing to accept an additional <br />560 <br />$20 per month fee for that change in policy. <br />561 <br />562 Member Seigler responded that he would support building a fund via fees to cover <br />563 long-term over the next year, unless the City performed clean -outs on a wholesale <br />564 level, otherwise he would support fees increasing sufficiently to cover costs over <br />565 the next year and over time grow that fund, with a line item on utility bills <br />566 defining that fee to cover the City assuming liability for lateral lines. <br />567 <br />568 <br />Mr. Schwartz responded that, if that were to occur, the City would need to further <br />569 <br />determine its risk in terms of damage, since this would put the onus on the City <br />570 <br />for future failures and sewer backups and other issues if proven negligent in <br />571 <br />keeping mains cleaned out. Mr. Schwartz clarified that currently the City is not <br />572 <br />typically liable for a lateral line failure provided it had documented maintenance <br />573 <br />of the main and the problem was in the lateral and not the main. <br />574 <br />575 <br />Chair Stenlund noted that televising the lines can be accomplished, but usually <br />576 <br />not all the way into the home due to difficult turns in the lines. <br />577 <br />578 <br />Mr. Culver noted that it was often difficult to make a determination where the <br />579 <br />blockage was at when property damage occurred, making it difficult to prove <br />580 <br />where responsibility laid. Mr. Culver questioned the shift for that responsibility <br />Page 13 of 17 <br />