By Amanda McCoy
amccoy@wbcowqel.com
A proposed sanitation annexation was the hot topic of the Economic Development Committee meeting Monday evening. Rob Ratliff, the City Law Director, updated the committee with the current negotiations concerning business and residential properties that fall outside the eastern city limits.
The committee focused its discussion on the clarification of an annexation ordinance that was passed in 1999. Ratliff voiced his concern for the improper enforcement of the documentation concerning the annexation’s terms of agreement. He specified that the ordinance requires the city to issue a deed to the consumer at the time the public utility service is provided. This deed would explain the agreements and restrictions of use.
Ratliff urged the council to adhere to this requirement as an example for future annexed customers. He then asked the committee to advise him in carrying out further negotiations.
The Economic Development Committee brainstormed about other potential properties they could bring into the annexation project; however, they took no action last night and agreed to proceed with negotiations according to policy.
After the Economic Development Committee meeting, the City Council’s Service Committee met to discuss various topics ranging from the inventory of city owned property to the concrete recycling project.
The Service Committee requested that Jeff Wagner, City Service/Safety Director, compile a list of city owned property, such as tables and chairs and other property that holds value lower than $10,000. Joyce Schifer, the City Auditor, clarified that annual inventory lists are update and kept for items that are ‘capital assets’ (those with value over $10,000) and also for consumable goods, such as gas, salt, etc.
The committee then brought up a request for city utility services outside the northeast boundary of the city sewer system on State Route 98. This led to a discussion on a proposed water treatment facility that would potentially provide the sewer extension required for the requested annexation; however, the railroad that runs across State Route 98 could pose a problem for this project. No action was made and the issue was left open.
The Service Committee also requested that an ordinance be put in motion to control the gas utility rates. This would coincide with the AEP electricity ordinance.
Finally, the Service Committee tackled the concrete recycling project. Bruce Truka spoke out expressing his desire for the project to come to a close. Wagner agreed with him, citing the project’s poor location (near a riverbank) and the inability to stabilize the amounts and types of material being placed at the recycling site.
John Walker, council person, rejected the proposal to close the project and articulated the usefulness of the recycling efforts. Walker pointed out that the recycled asphalt and concrete materials were crushed and mixed and used to form the base for the Spring Street/Charles Street paving project. He did express concern about improper dumping admitting that the city would receive backlash from the EPA if any material entered the river and caused the flow to take an unnatural course.
Wagner agreed that the project did provide an effective service to the community but asked that the project site be moved to a more central location, accessible to the community and gated. He also requested that provisional care be taken in the form of concrete dumping permits.
The committee suggested requiring a fee for dumping; however, they ultimately decided that the service should be provided free-of-charge since the city would benefit from the increased raw materials.