HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-07-1997 Meeting
I
I
I
ENGINEERING SERVICES
SUBCOMMITTEE
"POCKETS OF UNSEWERED AREAS"
COMMITTEE ROOM - July 7, 1997
12:30 P.M.
TRANSCRIBED VERBATIM
PRESENT: Hon. Larry E. Sconyers, Mayor; J.B. Powell, Chairman;
M. Todd, Vice Chairman; Kuhlke, Bridges, J. Brigham, Zetterberg,
Commissioners; R. Oliver, Administrator; Max Hicks and Tom
Wiedmeier, Augusta Utilities; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission.
ALSO PRESENT: Rosemary Forrest, Metro Spirit; Gale Minno, WBBQ;
Paul Garber, Augusta Chronicle.
The Clerk: These are the reports that Mr. Hicks had prepared as
prioritizing the areas.
Mr. Todd: Also, we want to let the record reflect that we
have some of the citizens that are concerned that live in some of
the areas. Lets first recap the criteria that they used to put that
in perspective. As I remember the criteria wasn't in the book of
the last Committee meeting, and we did receive it verbally at the
last Commission Meeting and basically, my position was as Vice-
Chairman of Engineering Services and the responsibility of Waste
Water to make sure that we were using criteria in deciding that it
wasn't a political decision and that we were adhering to the EPD
consent order that we are currently under. I'll let Mr. Hicks
recap the criteria, and we'll know what perimeters we are operating
under.
Mr. Hicks: In so far as the criteria that we used to
establish this preliminary or this ranking, we used the payback,
that is taking the number of customers, estimated income and
construction cost, how many years we anticipated that it would take
to recoup the money that was expended for construction. Now, not
all of the projects would ever pay back themselves, that being due
to the fact that we used an inflation rate of 3% a per year, so
some projects just never caught up, that's why you'll see on some
of them, the little infinity symbol, meaning that we really
couldn't predict a payback period. The other criteria, was the one
that had the shortest payback period received 10 points. The one
with the next shortest payback period received 9 points and so on
down. All of those that were infinity received 1 point each. Now,
the next category we used was the number of customers. That's
rather straight forward. The area with the largest number of
customers received 10 points, we then went down from there, 9,
8, 7, in descending order of the number of customers. Then the
next criteria, was the condition of the septic systems, that is
this was information that was received from the Health Department
regarding the complaints and the situation that they had observed
in the various areas. Their general comment was that those areas
north of Gcrdon Highway had the worst problems. They made a general
observation that they believe that was because of the more clay
content of the soil in those areas and that the ones generally to
the south, were in sandy soil, and were not as much as a problem, I
although, they would like to see all of those areas served by a
sanitary sewer system. Now, they did rank the ones that you will
see that have Health Department rank 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, those were
the ones that they did rank. Now, all the rest of them you'll see
car~/ 6's and that was just the ones that they didn't rank and so
we just gave them that designation. Again, the one that they
ranked number 1, received 10 points and then we went down 9, 8, 7,
6, in descending order, then we just totaled the points from this
simple matrix and the project with the greatest number of points
was ranked number one and then we went down the line from there.
So, this is the way we arrived at this priority. We did not
include that in our agenda item that we presented on June 23, we
just there set a possible prioritization of the projects based on
payback period, condition of existing septic systems and number of
customers is included, but we did not include this actual wav that
we had arrived at the priority, but this is it. And the ranking on
this sheet is exactly the same as what we had presented to you, and
this is the way that we had arrived at it. So, there are perhaps
other criteria, you might want to bring into play. And as we said
before this could easily be done anytime you are arriving at a
matrix, there are differences of opinion. For instance, you might
even want Health Department rankings to carry more weight, than say
number of customers, in which case they would get 15 or 20 points
for the top one. This is another thing. Or you might say well,
number of customers should get more than just the payback period. I
So there are ways to shift the points around, but we just took the
most straight forward approach and then once we arrived at this, we
knew that there would be potential or other input.
Mr. Todd: Can everybody agree with the criteria, do we have
anyone that disagrees with the criteria?
Mr. Kuhlke: I just wanted to ask this question. The way you
did this and I have no problem with it Max, but before you go
forward with this thing, if you look at the first one on there
where it has 336 customers and your base and your payback on 100%
of those people buying in, is it, would it be, before we really got
into doing that, would it be wise to do some type of survey to see
really how many people would sign up for it.
Mr. Oliver: They are required by law, I believe, aren't they
Max, to connect within 12 months?
Mr. Todd: I would like to hear from the County Attorney when
we start dealing with what's required by law, if it's ok. And if we
don't have it we can have them to get it.
Mr. Kuhlke:
I'm just asking that.
Mr. Wiedmeier: The state law states that any new construction
within 200 feet of a sanitary sewer has to connect to that sanitary I
sewer. It's a little ambiguous when you are talking about existing
structures with an existing septic system and you are extending
I
I
I
your new lines into the area. The Health 'Department says that what
they do is allow them to remain on their septic systems until it
requires work, either having the tank pumped or the drain field
worked on. At that time they require connection to the sanitary
sewer. So, based on that I don't think it likely that we'll 100%
connection upon completion of construction.
Mr. Powell: Mr. Hicks, these areas that you have targeted as
sewer pockets, are these areas totally saturated, I mean, do we
actually have people having septic problems because of the
saturation or, enlighten me on that. Do we sewer emerging from the
ground?
Mr. Hicks: The only area that I have personally become
involved in with a situation like that was in fact the Colony Park
area. And that was probably 2 years ago that I received a call and
went out and there was a situation where it was, we had some rainy
periods and it had been rather wet and there was some complaints.
But, other than that Commissioner
Mr. Kuhlke: J.B., in Nationals Hills, they have that problem.
Mr. Powell: The reason I'm bringing that up, Mr. Hicks, is I
had one area that is in my district, which is south of Tobacco
Road, that they do have the actual sewerage running down the
streets and I didn't see it on the list here and I had some
concerns with it, why it may not be targeted with it having that
saturation problem.
Mr. Wiedmeier: Since this list was developed, there have
been three projects that were omitted, Berckman Road, Almond Road,
Huxley Drive and Avondale. So I, don't claim that this is a
complete list of any areas that aren't on this list, let me know
and whatever criteria you thinking criteria we'll apply that
criteria and put them on the list.
Mr. Powell: Mr. Todd, Mr. Chairman, what I would like to see
us maybe do is contact the Commissioners in the area of each
district and see if they do have any potential problems that may
need to go onto this list and you can evaluate it any way that the
Waterworks or Utilities Director deems necessary whichever one he
thinks is the best route. But, I don't have any problems with
these proj ects, but I think that we have some other proj ects
throughout district that may need to be cooperated into this list.
Mr. Todd: The Engineering Services Committee was given a
list, I guess, several weeks ago and basically we were suppose to
have responded to that list. And I guess that my problem is that
it's the responsibility of the Utilities Department to know where
those pockets are and to come up with a method of locating those
pockets and not me as a Commissioner. But, the concern that I had
then and now or at least at the last meeting, whether we had
everybody included. So I share that concern and I actually rode a
little bit with Mr. Wiedmeier this morning to look at some of the
areas that I wasn't quite familiar with on Berckman Road and in
west Richmond County and on that ride he shared with me that he I
wasn't as familiar with south Richmond County as I probably am or
some of the others. So, maybe we need to get someone that's been
working the south Richmond side of the city to talk a closer look
at that k."lOW some history about the south Richmond side. I
certainly agree there and I think that it should be the Utilities
Department responsibility to come up with a list that makes all the
districts hold as far as any pockets go. And I think that this
Committee or the Engineering Services Committee can direct them to
do that. And also, I think that we will get to the funding a
little later. But, I think in the revenue fund we have identified
funding to take care of the problems north of the Gordon Highway
and in the renewal and expansion funds south of the Gordon Highway
there is money to take care of that problem. So, I think there is
going to be plenty of funds to take care of them once we identify
them, so the funds are not the issue.
Mr. Oliver: Could we define pockets so everybody is working
on the same definition. To me, a pocket means, an area where you
already have sewer on all four sides and there is an area where
sewer is missing or is the definition of pocket, to some people
broader than that?
Mr. Todd: My definition of pockets would be, where we have
situations where it was not feasible in the past to put sewerage ,
so they missed it because of funding, or whatever, and it may be al I
four sides or three sides if they are backed up on the river, you
know. But, there is sewerage around them.
Mr. Oliver: So if you have an area of the County where
sewerage comes out to, say this point here and there is no serge
beyond there, you don't consider it, I think definition is very
important here, that you don't consider this as an expansion then
to you, and not a pocket. Is everybody in agreement with that
definition.
Mr. Powell: Well yes, and no. The area that I'm concerned
with has sewerage on north of Tobacco Road and it also has sewerage
south of Willis Foreman Road. So, it's in a gap there. It's got it
on two sides, but no it doesn't have it on four. Fort Gordon would
be on the other side.
Mr. Todd: Does the Horse Pen line going to take care of most
of that or not?
Mr. Powell: No sir. The Horse Pen trunk line will pick up
the third side of this area. And, the problem that we are having
there is saturated, it's just developed eminencely and we have
actually got raw sewerage coming up and running down the street.
And it needs to be corrected. And if that falls under the
definition of a pocket so be it, if it doesn't I think we'll have I
to get us another terminology for it, but we need some sewerage.
I
I
I
Mr. Todd: Are we talking Sand Ridge by any chance?
Mr. Powell: No sir. It's the Jamestown area. And like I
said, it's got sewerage on north of Tobacco Road on one side of
the street, it's got sewerage at Willis Foreman, but it's in
between the two lines and the horse pen trunk line will come in on
the third.
Mr. Todd: I have knowledge of that one. We had some problems
with that in that area around the ball fields and it's true that
they have a problem. I think that one of the criteria should be
also if there is room to expand the drain field on per size lots.
I know some of the lots that I looked at this morning are small
lots and some of them are half acre or larger lots, and I think
that's got to be a consideration on it, in that we will take care
of the ones where there is not room first, then work our way up,
even in the category of what we are looking at. So, I don't know
whether everybody is comfortable with adding that to the criteria,
but if a man doesn't have enough land to expand it, there is
nothing for him to do but spend a lot of money to have it pumped
and he'll have to have it pumped quite regularly, where if he has
room, then you know there is something that he can get relief by.
Mr. Hicks: It could be average size of lot, we could do that
by getting the area involved and dividing it by the number of lots,
that would be a criteria.
Mr. Todd: Right. And we don't mind comments from the public,
we would want to keep it somewhat limited, a minute or so a couple
of minutes, but we don't mind comments, because this is going to
impact you the public.
Mr. Hicks: One of the methodologies that we used,
Mr. Cameron, and in determining the pockets of unsewered areas on
the south side, particularly where we were not as familiar, was to
use the water customers and where there was water only, and when we
noticed that there was an area of water only customers that they
would kind of stand out. Now, Jim you were involved in that
weren't you? Or was it you that did that Tom.
Mr. Wiedmeier: We tried that however, there were a lot sewers
that had been extended into those areas and the people have not yet
connected, so you know there would be a bunch of residents show up
on a particular street that really wasn't reflective,of where sewer
was. We did include our people who had worked with the former
county system in compiling these lists and I don't think there are
any major areas that are left out, maybe some real small ones that
are.
Mr. Todd: We are going to get back to Mr. Brigham in a second
and get back to Mr. Powell to your concern. But, I want to make
sure that everybody agrees with the criteria expanding it to size
of lots, there is no disagreement there on the ranking on which one
we'll do first, do second, etc. And, as far as the concern about
the area of Jamestown, I think that it would be in there and I I
think that it's probably is a pocket by the definition that we have
Fort Gordon there, but it's highly unlikely that we'll be running
sewer out there anytime soon. So, we can add Jamestown to the
list.
Mr. Powell: I have one comment. That's one area that I know
of that I have, these other gentlemen may k."lOW some more areas that
they have. I don't want to limit it to my one project to add on
there. I think that we all need to have some input on it, and
that's my concern.
Mr. Bridges: I think that we can go by the criteria of how
he's figured up points, we can just give him our areas that we
might know about and see where, or however they fallout, they fall
out.
Mr. J. Brigham: I have several concerns; (1) I think when we
expand it, I think that we need to expand it to the age of the
neighborhoods involved. I think that's where we have seen,
including Jamestown, I think it's an older, established subdivision
that doesn't have sewer for whatever reason, whoever served them,
whether it be the old city or the old county. Now, the areas that
I'm familiar with that are in my district are basically older
neighborhoods, that were built in the late '40's, early '50's.
Sewer was not a major concern at that time, everybody put in septic I
tanks, that's the way it was done. These areas have since had
areas, in my area particularly, expanded around them, there are
sewers all around them, except these areas have never went back and
the extensions have never been served to these areas, or either you
have geographical problems with height and low valleys, and that
type of thing. Several of the areas that are ...,
Mr. Todd: Let's take one at a time. Let's take the longevity
first. Is everybody in agreement to consider that ....
Mr. Hicks: Age of neighborhood.
Mr. Todd:
problems there.
Age of neighborhood, yea. We don't have any
Let's go on to the next one.
Mr. Oliver: Do it on the same 10 through 1 basis then, the
oldest neighborhood gets a 10 and then it comes on down.
Mr. J. Brigham: I think you'll have to go in that style. The
other thing that I'm concerned about is, like the way it was
expressed to me about National Hills, is the problem is that you
have a sewer on top of the hill and you have customers at the
bottom of the hill. The expense of pumping the sewerage up the
hill, or I don't know why it was never, I'm sure that there are
lines at the bottom of the hill farther down, why it wasn't
expanded, I don't
Mr. Wiedmeier:
I can't figure out why National Hills, that
I
I
I
I
part of ....
Mr.
area in
for some
J. Brigham:
between the
reason.
But that's the concern, right. There is an
bottom and the top that does not have sewer
Mr. Kuhlke:
Is that the lift station?
Mr. Wiedmeier: No, that one can be gravity served.
Mr. Kuhlke: You think so?
Mr. Todd: What's the least expensive, the length or gravity?
Mr. J. Brigham: Gravity is the least expensive.
Mr. Todd: I mean, you would have to factor in the footage and
all. But it would be gravity for that situation.
Mr. J. Brigham: The other thing is, I think we, also, I don't
know how these cost were derived. Some of them it may be cheaper
to put in some lift stations, probably in the area concerning Heath
Drive and there, it's running the sewer line through the Augusta
National, because it' got to be sewer in Jamestown. I know there
is sewer there, isn't it?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, there is.
Mr. J. Brigham: But it might be cheaper to put in a lift
station there, than to go all the way through the National. And I
don't know how these cost were derived, that's what concerns me.
Mr. Todd: Yes. We talked about that. What we were
discussing the Rae's Creek, and Rocky Creek and whether it would be
best to go Rocky Creek, when we had an issue with Rae's Creek. And
Tom, I have to rely on him, as far as the engineering side of it
goes. So, what he's telling me is that it would be more feasible
to go through the Augusta National and the Augusta National has
been very friendly.
Mr. J. Brigham: Right. As you pointed out when you go that
distance your cost goes up tremendously. And I don't know that we
wouldn't be better off to put in a pump station and tie back into
an existing sewer system that's already there, and I think that we
need to look at that. I'm not trying to pick at everything
particularly.
Mr. Todd:
everybody.
Yes, I understand that. We want' input from
Mr. Brigham: But these are my concerns. As far as determining
the list, I haven't had any input particularly, other than I have
complained to Max Hicks for the last year and a half, because I was
getting complaints about unpocketed sewer areas. And if that's
input, I think all of us do that. I know that the rest of you I
would if you had the same type concerns. If you had people calling
you saying, hey look I have to replace my septic tank, when are you
all going to get the sewer to me, you would be picking up the phone
trying to find out what the problem is also, that's just
constituent service, we all do it.
Mr. Todd: Yes. I think that one of the basis services that
if there is anyway possible, that government should provide is
sewerage and water or water and sewerage.
Mr. Brigham: I also, in the long run, as far as further
development, I think that we got to, when we address the expansion
of a new subdivision regulations, we have got to make it encumbered
upon the developers to include sewerage in those developments.
Otherwise we are just headed for even greater catastrophe.
Mr. Todd: If we have the capacity to do the tap, I don't have
a problem with that one. If we are going to have them to do dry
sewerage and septic tanks, with waiting on us to do future will
bankrupt them.
Mr. Brigham: I think that we should make the effort to
provide the service to the If we are approving the
subdivision, we should know where the lines are and we basically
have major trunk lines allover this county.
Mr. Todd: I guess the other one that you mentioned is
elevation and that fits into the criteria, as far as where there is
special situations as far as elevations go and ...
I
Mr. Hicks:
criteria.
I would be a little more difficult to assign a
Mr. Brigham: I don't know how you would assign a criteria to
it, but I think it needs to be reflective in, when you look at the
cost situation, the payback, if there is an unusual situation we
need to be made aware of the fact that there is an unusual
situation.
Mr. Hicks: The cost, basically reflects that. For instance,
one that Mr. Brigham was asking about is the Berckman Road
situation and it does have about a two or three thousand put out
fall line across the Augusta National. The cost of that out fall
line weighted against the cost of the sewerage pumping station,
would be, the sewerage pumping station would be roughly about $30
to $35 thousand dollars, the line would be roughly the same cost.
Then if you get a lift station you would have the annual operating
cost on top of that, so that's why we made the comment that gravity
is generally cheaper to go. But, I don't know how we would assign
a criteria on elevation, that is reflective in the overall cost.
Mr. Todd: I think that, we don't have a consensus there,
because I see some heads shaking up here. I'm going to move to Mr.
I
I
I
I
Zetterberg.
Mr. Zetterberg: I was just concerned, because I had a good
handle on what we were after in the first place and now I'm hearing
this expanding, I've come to the conclusion that I really don't
qUite understand what the sewer services for the entire county, and
is there a master plan for that.
Mr. Hicks: There is a map that's prepared right not that
shows the extent of the sewer systems, both to the south and to the
west, generally, the most extension that's needed would be to the
south side. On the western side, probably the area needing the
most attention is the extension of Rae's Creek on out along and
parallel to Wrightsboro Road going on toward the Columbia County
line. On the south side, the primary area is almost all along the
entire face of the south side of the county. Of course, Pen Trunk,
being one of those areas. And so there is an over all plan to
extend the sewer lines and we have not tried to call archives
whether that area along Wrightsboro Road should have priority over
Horse Pen Trunk or any of those others. We have not tried to
assign priori ties to those. But there is an overall plan for
expanding.
Mr. Todd: Thanks. If we could move along. There is one other
one that was mentioned as far as possible criteria and that is the
number of folks that would be willing to sign up, or do we want to
just run sewerage into the areas with a possibility of not having
individuals not wanting to sign up or do we want to try and at
least encourage or get a percentage, whether it's 30, 40, 50, or
60% to volunteer to sign up before we run it.
Mr. Oliver: Well, I think that's a worth while effort. I
think there is a lot of man power required to do that, and that is
going to be the problem. And then any of those representations you
get are going to reciprocate some discussion.
Mr. Todd: I would think that we could
questionnaire with the water bills where they don't
on whether they would be interested in sewerage.
just send a
have sewerage
Mr. Oliver: I can't answer for a specific exercise like that,
but typically on an unsolicited questionnaire you would probably be
lucky to get 5 to 8% of them back, regardless of how someone feels.
But, you may get a higher percentage, I don't know. The best way
would be to obviously call them, but that's time consuming.
Mr. Todd:
please sir.
Mr. Cunningham, limit it to a couple of minutes,
Mr. Cunningham: I'll try to. Is it acknowledged that the
present systems are an accumulation of being financed by the users
that are using them now, and that the government, basically doesn't
have anything except a supervisory or a controlled or a management
function in continuing the system along the lines. And is it
acknowledged that as of the first of January 1996, when the two I
governments were merged, and these systems became one, that
everything that was involved in these systems was transferred to
the new system and the new government to take and manage on that
basis. And is it acknowledged that people are suppose to pay for
what they get and so if they don't already have sewerage and they
have the sewerage run into them then it's up to this body to
establish the fees that ought to be charged for that sewerage to be
run into there to them and then the operating fee which they put,
you charge a fee for the tying on to set the system up, it's
consumed in the operation and the fee that they pay each month is
consumed, so that if the payout on a situation is not what it is
expected, whatever standard you want to set for the payout, is not
for that way, then there ought to be a surcharge up front for that
particular area or that particular situation. And that's one of the
functions of taxing district or the function of a municipality. In
this community nobody has ever gotten free water and free sewerage
and it's always been based on what it cost at that time and that's
the prime reason over the years that there are areas of pockets
that you are talking about. Where the lift stations are needed, I
mean, I can give you several examples of it; one of them at North
Leg and Wrightsboro Road, there has been a sewer line run from the
old Camp Hancock, World War I ran down there and it had a motorium
on it, and you couldn't tie on to it and when we built the Wife
Saver at North Leg and Wrightsboro Road, we had to make arrangement
to go through and go into the oxidation pond back behind, and now I
we are in a sewer problem. And when I built the Wife Saver at'
Milledgeville Road, we did not have sewerage. I built septic tanks,
I had to buy extra land to put me a septic tank in and when septic
tanks didn't function, I had to at my expense, get with the city
who owned the lines and run a line down to Murphy's school, then I
had to deed it over to the City, so it became a part of the system.
I did at Washington Road ...
Mr. Todd: We are running out of time.
Mr. Cunningham: You hear what I'm talking about. If you all
would establish a policy to let people know ahead of time what it's
going to cost them to tie on to it, and then they either tie on to
it or they fight with the health department. And I think that the
matter here is to just set the price what's it going to cost and
then if people don't want to do it, they don't develop the land or
they don't take entitlement to it. Thank you sir.
Mr. Todd: Thank you for your consideration Mr. Cunningham.
We need to go on to the other areas that we need to deal with and
I guess that the consent order, because we are going to be into Mr.
Brighams time.
Mr. Kuhlke: What I wanted to see is if we could do, it
appears to that the areas that are identified on the map are what I
the Utilities Department say are pocket areas, and if we are going
to get this process moving, it would seem to me that we should
accept the areas that they are talking about, either accept or
I
I
I
rej ect the criteria that they set forth here from a ranking
standpoint. But obviously, we are not going to have but so much
money to do things and it would seem to me that if the rankings are
acceptable and depending on the funds that we have, that we can go
ahead and begin the process. We can't do them all.
Mr. Todd: I'll accept a motion to go on an approve all of
them except Rae's Creek, we will have to deal with the Rae's Creek
issue as far as EPD goes and that we approve the engineering on
Rae's Creek and we approve it or we can go on approve it
providing that EPD approves the list as far as Rae's Creek projects
go.
Mr. Kuhlke: But that, we have to do that any way. I mean we
can't tie into Rae's Creek without getting approval from EPD. But,
I would like to make a motion that we accept the recommendation of
the Utilities Department and, based on funding availability that we
Mr. Todd: From the revenue bond?
Mr. Kuhlke: The revenue bond, yea. That we go ahead and
proceed with the engineering on what we can afford to do at this
point and that the Utilities Department have the responsibility of
getting approval from EPD for us to tie into Rae's Creek.
Mr. Todd: Will you accept the amendment that we authorize the
County Attorney's office and the Utilities Department to request an
amendment of the consent order?
Mr. Kuhlke: Lori, the way I read that consent order is that
we have to make specific request to EPD before we can tie into the
Rae's Creek sewer line and so I'm not sure they would amend the
order, but that if we make a request they either approve it or deny
it, am I reading it correctly?
Ms. D'Alessio: Yes, that is correct. And it also provides
that the prohibition against making any changes without their
approval, only last until the trunk line rehab project is completed
and my understanding from Jim was that Tom was under the impression
that we would be able to be out from under this consent order
possibly before we would be looking at any projects there.
Mr. Todd: Well, initially it was the clean lines, now we are
replacing so I would assume in that case we may be, but my position
is that I would want to go out there and do the engineering and
complete the lines and run into a problem on tying them in. I don't
think with EPD having the controls and that there are other things
that can happen, gentlemen between now and the time that you tie in
that could put you under an additional or an extended consent
order, if you have another overflow. There are some things that can
happen that can put us in a bind, so I would prefer to have a
letter from EPD in writing.
Mr. Brigham: I don't think that should stop all of the work I
in process. I think that we can write the letter and go ahead and
get that approval, I don't have a problem doing that. The other .
thing is, from what Mr. Wiedmeier was telling me, I believe, due to
the fact that we are trying to connect unpocketed sewerage areas
where the septic tank service that the EPD is liable to look more
favorable on it, we extend that service to insure the overall
improvement of the water quality in the basin.
Mr. Todd: If the Health Department says that it is a health
issue, as I understand it ...
Mr. Brigham: The Health Department has already said that.
Mr. Kuhlke: I'll accept your amendment but I think that
rather than amending the consent order that we instruct the
Attorney to write a letter. I'll accept that.
Mr. Todd: We have dealt with some other entities or agencies,
second or third parties or whatever, in the past, both governments
or at least one government alleged, and they say, well they told us
this or they told us that and we got spanked on the hand severely
and I want it in writing. Because ultimately, we are responsible,
the Commissioners and the Mayor.
Mr. Bridges: I have a question on the funding? Where is the
funding going coming from out of the bond issue?
Mr. Kuhlke:
$2 billion is in there, if I read it correctly.
I
Mr. Bridges: Is that the extent, sewer to water only
customers, is that what we ...
Mr. Todd: Yes. That was in the bond referendum to extend
sewer to water only customers.
Mr. Bridges: So that's $2.5 million to the year 2000 and then
$2.5 million to the year 2005.
Mr. Hicks: On the bond issue, that's just a flat $2 million
dollars. The money primarily for these projects, I would
anticipate would come from a renewal and extension. There is an
estimated $4 million dollars in here that would be available for
sewer line extension, but Mr. McKie would be the one who would need
to comment more to that.
Mr. Todd: Why can't we use the bond money.
Mr. Brigham: We are going to use that in addition to.
Mr. Hicks: But there is only $2 million dollars.
I
Mr. Todd: I would like to motion if it's possible to for the
renewal and expansion money that was collected pre 1996, take care
I
I
I
of the , and then we take the bond money and other monies and
we'll work out the
Mr. Brigham: What about the current renewal and extension
money that is coming in from the areas that are being served. Can
it go towards paying these payments.
Mr. Todd: Yes.
Mr. Brigham: That's the money I'm looking at for the payment.
Mr. Todd: Is the money there Mr. McKie?
Mr. McKie: I'm a little confused. Money coming in from
current billings extension to make what payments?
Mr. Brigham: To help pay for the extension of service into
the unpocketed sewer areas.
Mr. McKie: Absolutely.
Mr. Brigham: There's more than enough money there, is it not?
Helping to extend that.
Mr. McKie: I don't have any figures right now.
Mr. Oliver: Well, there isn't enough money to do this entire
list right now.
Mr. Brigham: I understand that. But over a period of years.
Well not all of these areas are north of the Gordon Highway anyway.
Mr. Oliver: What I would suggest is, that we start at the top
of the list, go in priority order, as far as the fund will permit
us to go.
Mr. Todd: If we are dealing with the revenue bond money, I
don't have a problem with that. Did you capture the motion as far
as we got? I knew when we got to the money we would get in an
argument.
Mrs. Bonner: Well, what I have so far is to approve
At the beginning we approved adding Jamestown to this.
not prioritizing and you don't know where it will fit on
the list.
But it's
the list.
Mr. Todd: It's to go back to Utilities to put it through the
criteria and prioritize it.
Mrs. Bonner: To put it on the list, ok. To approve the list
based on the funding available coming from the revenue bonds and to
proceed with the projects with the availability of funds and to
authorize Augusta Utilities to request an amendment to the consent
order.
Mr. Kuhlke: You might want to, in addition to the bond funds,
based on what Mr. Brigham said is to water
Mrs. Bonner: Water sewer and renewal fund.
I
Mr. Kuhlke: Yea.
Mr. Todd: Use a percentage of that collected after '96.
We also loaned $10 million dollars that is to come back to that
fund, so I don't think that it's all really spent. It's $10
million dollars coming back, and those $10 million dollars can be
used for the south of the Gordon Highway pockets expansion. So, we
go the motion.
Mrs. Bonner: Yes. We don't have a second to it.
Mr. Todd:
I will second the motion.
Mrs. Bonner: Motion to approve the list based on the funding
availability from revenue bonds and the water and sewer renewal and
extension funds collected after '96, and to proceed with projects
with the availability of funds and authorizing the Augusta
Utilities Department to request an amendment to the consent order
from EPD.
Mr. Todd: You heard the motion.
Mr. Zetterberg: I have one more question.
couple of other areas that were mentioned. Tom, you
one on Almond and Huxley had not been on that list.
added to the list?
There were a
mentioned the
Will those be
I
Mr. Todd: Yes. In that motion also
accept an amendment, we'll send those
Department to prioritize per the criteria
we'll send, if you will
back to the Utilities
we set.
Mr. Oliver: Might I suggest that since this is a Committee
meeting and I don't believe they can take formal action today, even
though there are six of them here. What I would like to do is
prepare an agenda item that's going to come back to the full
Commission that recites this perfectly, ok so that there is no
misunderstanding and we will do that a week from tomorrow.
Mr. Todd: Mr. Chairman do you have a problem with this going
back to Engineering Services?
Mr. Powell: No. I have no problem with it going back
through. Bring the report back to Committee and let the Committee
send it on to the full Commission will be fine.
Mr. Oliver: And if we do it as an agenda item, I think then
we can make sure we capture the essence of what is said.
Mr. Kuhlke: And this motion, I guess, is a motion to go back
I
I
to Engineering Services.
Mrs. Bonner: For a recommendation.
Mr. Oliver: What I was hoping was that Max could get the, do
you think that you can get these other areas input in time for the
next Commission meeting?
Mr. Hicks: Commission?
Mr. Oliver: Or do you want to send it to Committee?
Mr. Bridges: Or do you want to do it today
Mr. Powell: Mr. Chairman, my concern is still, as I brought
up, I had an area that is not on the list that was very crucial.
I still think that there are probably some areas out there that,
we have no representation at all from the east Augusta area, that
probably are going to have some things that they will need to add
to this list that need to be, at least looked at.
I
Mr. Todd: I can answer for everybody but District 2, District
2, we are sure about. District 5, we've taken care of on here.
We've completed the Kissingbower on here, and District 2 is the
only one out there. East Augusta is basically going, is the old
City, except east Augusta, from my understanding that's taken care
of per Tom. But, we can also send a fax out to each Commissioner
to check and get it back to us and we can do that by the next
Committee meeting. The voting members here or the Committee that
the Chairman of the Engineering Services Committee appointed is Mr.
Bill Kuhlke, Mr. Ulmer Bridges, himself, Mr. J.B. Powell, and Moses
Todd, that's who will be voting on this Committee. So, we don't
even, we couldn't take a form of action anyway.
Mr. Brigham: How are you doing the money split, are you going
to include the suburban projects at the south end of the county out
of the urban, out of the renewal extension money to add to the pot.
Mr. Todd:
I thought we had the issue of the money resolved.
Mr. Brigham: No. You had the bond money and the '96 money.
Now, not all these projects are old City projects in service areas.
Some of them are areas in South Richmond County, are you going to
take that out of the $12 million dollars, that seems to be the
sticking point, or are we going to just leave that for something
else to expand with. Or is this a separate expansion fund?
I
Mr. Todd: There is the $10 million dollars that we loaned to
the urban services district, which is to be paid back, is there.
And it's my understanding from the Comptroller, that other than
that, there is not a lot of money there. But that money is
Mr. Brigham: I can see on the list of projects; Tobacco Road,
Deans Bridge Road, Walden Acres, Fairview, can't some of this money
come out of that $10 million dollars is what I'm asking?
Mr. Todd:
expansion money
Gcrdon Highway.
Well, I
after '96
So
would think a percentage of the urban
is being paid by individuals south of the
Mr. Brigham: But, it would speed up the process of everybody
getting sewer if we used some it.
I believe
Mr. Todd: We are going to have a vote on this.
there is enough people
Mr. Brigham: The people that are going to be affected are not
being represented. So if we don't point it out, we don't get no
where on it.
Mr. Todd: We'll debate that at the Engineering Services
Committee meeting.
Mr. Brigham:
I'm sure we will.
Mr. Todd: We have a consensus here on this and its better
than what I thought we were going to do. So, I'm going to back
this one. And, we'll deal with that in Engineering Services, Mr.
Brigham. I'm calling the question. All in favor, raise your hand.
Unanimous. Thank you.
Mr. Oliver: Do you want us to bring this back to Engineering
Services two weeks from today, or do you want us to bring this to
the full Commission.
Mr. Todd: Engineering Services, two weeks from today. We
need to write letters to EPD.
Mr. Oliver: Ok. And Max will you send out a letter to all
Commissioners then and ask them for any, give them a list and ask
for any additions to this list and tell them that we will need it
by the end of the week, so we can do what we need to do.
With no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
bjb
I
I
I
I
I
I
# of Health
Payback CuStomers Dept. Tot
Project COSt Yrs Pts # Pts Rank Pts Pts.
Colony Park $770,000 12.3 9 336 10 2 9 28
Bedford Heights $654,508 22.5 7 190 8 1 10 25
National Hills $187,312 7.5 10 116 5 5 6 21
Kissingbower Rd. $662,080 36.9 4 164 7 6 5 16
McDuffie Rd. $1,765,621 co 1 227 9 6 5 15
Sherwood $211,498 26.9 5 55 3 5 6 14
Berkman Road $657,995 62.8 2 115 4 3 8 14
Beaver Drive $122,709 22.1 8 36 1 6 T ~5 14
Meadowbrook Drive $ 722,225 53.0 3 134 6 6 5 14
Davis/Camilla $112,177 25.7 6 30 1 6 5 12
Skinner/Tremont $533,499 co 1 38 1 4 7 9
Fairview/Belmont $209,513 co 1 20 1 5 6 8
Walton Acres $345,190 co 1 50 2 6 5 8
Deans Bridge Rd. Area $560,517 co 1 45 1 6 5 7
Sharon Road $281,520 co 1 39 1 6 5 7
Tobacco Road $1,278,120 co 1 47 1 6 5 7
Sewer Extensions to Unsewered Pockets
I
Criteria
A. Payback Period
Shortest payback period
Next shortest payback period
10 points
9 points
ete.
B. Number of Customers
Largest number
Next largest number
10 points
9 points
ete.
C. Condition of Septic Systems (Provided by Health Dept.)
Most problems 10 points
Next 9 points
ete.
T~
Each projea has been assigned points for each of the criteria, and the points totaled for I
each projea. Initial ranking will be based on total points for each projea.
I