Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSJS 2000 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEJANUARY 18, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on January 18, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca Jim Schug *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca *Cathy Valentino, town of Ithaca Gary Gleason, Chief Operator Bill Gray, City Superintendent Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Brent Cross, Village of Cayuga Heights Engineer David Herrick, TG Miller, P.C. Jerry Hook, Stearns & Wheler ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Steve Ehrhardt, City of Ithaca Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller *Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca *Steve Ehrhardt, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca *Mark Varvayams, Town of Dryden Cathy Valentino, Vice Chair, opened the meeting. 1. Approval of December Minutes Postponed until the next meeting, no quorum. 2. Updates on SEQR, if any Larry introduced Jerry Hook from Stearns & Wheler. Jerry reported that there is a meeting in the morning of January 27th in Cortland to discuss SEQR requirements for the next phase of the project and schedule work elements. The larger Intermunicipal Agreement is on the list to discuss on the 27th, that needs to move along. 2 Jerry mentioned that we are also going to talk about scheduling a scoping session. 3. Updates on DEC items, if any. Brent Cross, Cayuga Heights Village Engineer, quoted Mayor Anderson saying that the Mayor felt that the sooner action was taken, the better for all parties. Cathy thought it would be helpful if we received a quick summary of the project including a structure and time frame in addition to the funding amounts. 4. Staff Reports Gary handed out a proposal prepared by Hershey Energy System that outlined the implementation of a process that would result in uniform and controlled electrical consumption resulting in significant savings to the owners for utilities. Basically, the proposal which required the installation of sophisticated equipment costing about $90,000, would result in savings to the owners that would constitute more than the cost and the equipment would then be paid for out of monies saved resulting in no extra cost for the system. Gary also mentioned that he had involved Auburn Armature personnel in the review of the proposal and was informed by those individuals, that, because of the guarantee included in the Hershey Proposal, the owners should enter into an agreement with Hershey, if and only if, the attorneys for the municipality agreed that the guarantee was truly what it appeared to them to be. The SJS was requested to review the proposal prior to the meeting in February when the Hershey representatives would make a formal presentation of their project to the SJS. In addition, a copy of the proposal would be sent to Attorney Susan Brock and her presence would also be requested for the meeting in February. It is anticipated that at that meeting, Susan Brock will advise the committee on the credibility of the proposal and warrantee. 5. Financial Reports Nothing to report. 6. Old Business - Year 2000 Schedule of Meetings Larry thought for all that we have going on, we should meet every month for at least 6 months. Keep it as the 3rd Tuesday @ 12:30 PM. February 15th will be the next meeting date. 3 7. New Business 8. Adjournment The next regularly scheduled meeting is set for February 15th @ 12:30 PM. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEFEBRUARY 15, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on February 15, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca Gary Gleason, Chief Operator Bill Gray, City Superintendent Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Susan Brock, SJS Attorney Ray Davis, Hershey Energy ,Hershey Energy ,Hershey Energy Jerry Hook, Stearns & Wheler Brent Cross, Village of Cayuga Heights Engineer Steve Thayer, Deputy Controller Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Steve Ehrhardt, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca Cathy Valentino, Vice Chair, opened the meeting. 1. Hershey Energy Presentation Background: The Hershey proposal referred to a contract between Hershey Energy and the IAWWTF that would result in the installation of certain electroflo equipment (invented and fabricated by Hershey) proprietary to Hershey, which, after installation, would result in significant savings to the IAWWTF in electrical costs. Briefly, the proposed equipment would stabilize electrical energy resulting in increased efficiency of consumption. 2 There are two methods of purchase for the equipment. One time payment of $90,000. or Payments monthly for five years of about $2,070 per month. Using this scenario a guarantee of about $100 savings over and above the cost of the equipment payment of $2,070 was included in the proposal. Although that figure of $100 was guaranteed, the actual expected savings would be $1,548. At the end of the five year lease period, all savings would be realized by the IAWWTF. Hershey actually prepared a proposal for the IAWWTF on May 19, 1999 and this proposal was reviewed by staff and presented to Susan Brock, Attorney at Law for further review and interpretation of the contract as illustrated in the proposal. Staff had included representatives from Auburn Armature to assist in review of the proposal as the program applied to the IAWWTF. Auburn Armature and Staff agreed that the proposal regarding technology was sound as long as the guarantee was also sound as it appeared. At the meeting of this date, the proposal was handed out to each member present. After a short presentation by the Hershey representatives, Susan informed those present that the guarantee in the contract, as proposed was not truly for the five years ( the lease period) but for only the first year. Hershey representatives replied that the intention was for the guarantee to last for the life of the lease period of five years and that an addendum would be presented to the IAWWTF. Several questions were asked of the Hershey representatives including queries about results from other installations, other payment requirements for such items as replacement of failed equipment, and a listing of new installations with a tract record of savings. Hershey representatives provided a listing of new installations and added that a maintenance contract would be provided at a cost to the IAWWTF which would provide for replacement of failed or damaged equipment. The representatives of Hershey Energy Systems were informed that approximately three months would be needed for staff to communicate with similar installations. Meanwhile, Hershey representatives would address the concerns regarding the proposal of Staff, members of the SJS, and the SJS consulting engineer, Stearns and Wheler, (Jerry Hook). 3 2. Approval of December, 1999 Minutes & January, 2000 Notes Cathy asked for a motion to approve the December Minutes and January Notes. The motion was made and seconded. All were in favor and the motion was carried. 3. Updates on SEQRA Jerry Hook mentioned that there was a meeting with overview of project at the DEC in Cortland. There were a few action items that came from that meeting, one of them being prepare an overview document, being requested by DEC as the lead agency. Jerry had 6 six copies of the draft to distribute to the six municipalities, comments requested back ASAP. This document is for the purpose of taking the 1999 Unified Engineering Report and summarizing it, in a brief format. The one thing that is missing from here is a discussion of the Intermunicipal Agreement and its status. Jerry thinks the approach that needs to be taken is for SEQRA to proceed to scoping. By each individual municipality signing the unified engineering report, you basically agree to the physical concept of an Intermunicipal agreement in terms of flow distribution. That is flow coming from Lansing through Cayuga Heights being diverted to the IAWWTF. The actuality of how that is paid whether it is as customers or partners, is not pertinent to the SEQRA process. If everyone is in agreement, Jerry will proceed with that aspect. Cathy mentioned that one of the things they asked up front was an agreement on some kind of oversight committee. We have to name a government entity that would be the fiscally responsible processor. Jerry said that is if there is a permanent bond act application. Jerry also mentioned that for DEC to legitimately be the lead agency, there needs to be a permit application that involves the DEC. We agreed at the meeting the easiest permit application we can get in place would be the required modifications for Cayuga Heights and the IAWWTF. So we are working on drafting those applications and will have them within a couple of days, waiting for data from Cayuga Heights. One of the decisions that need to be made is what actual phosphorus limit should we request. There is no mandate or regulation that is driving the state to issue a new phosphorous limit for either one of these plants. The best thing that they can hang their hat on right now, is a no net increase. They want us to go to a much lower limit. The technology that we are putting in, we feel comfortable saying we can get down .2 mg/l, but right now with what is in the engineering report that is being submitted, that technology will not treat the entire flow. It will treat 9.4 mgd with the potential of going up to 13 mgd. The current permit is at 1 mg/l. A very conservative approach would be to ask the State, seeing how this is a voluntary upgrade, we want to request our limit to be written as .4 mg/l. 4 Larry felt comfortable with .4 mg/l. Brent isn’t comfortable going that far. Brent wanted to know why we couldn’t go with .5 mg/l. Jerry said we don’t need to make a decision today, when we get the draft permit, then we’ll have to look closer. Next scoping session will be March 2nd at the Corltand DEC Office. Mary had a question, about the planning area. 4. Updates on DEC items Larry reported that at the end of February, beginning of March, we’ll hear on this round of funding. Brent thought what he heard at the Cortland meeting that there was no time table and it would depend on our actions. They weren’t going to give a timetable, they expected us to do certain things. Judge how much money we deserve to get, so to speak, based on our actions, and based on our intermunicpal agreement progress. Or even more specifically the spending of the dollars we have already been offered. Brent is of the impression from a personal discussion with Steve that if we don’t do one or both of those things, there is no money. Larry said that Steve is giving conflicting massages out. Larry had the opportunity in NY to talk with Steve’s main assistant Jim Burke, because he tends to be more of the engineering type who doesn’t give you a whole bunch of foam. Steve is getting a lot of pressure from Albany about us moving forward with the first money we got. Jim Burke said, that as far as he new, all of the recommendations for the second round that the region made to Albany were still in the works. What that meant, is they went in and asked for 7 of the 14 million, 5 of which was going to filtering and 2 split to Lansing sewers and City/Town interceptors. So that is as much as we know and Jim was more definite about the act that nothing much had changed since October. Steve is getting pressure to start using the first money from 1998. Gary didn’t know how we could select a process until we know how much money we have. Susan thought he said put all of the unified engineering report projects in right now and if certain things don’t get funded, things get pulled out of the SEQR. Susan reported that he said we could get some money right now, the project phase 1 interceptor work has already been done. Submit the paperwork and sign contracts and that money could be awarded now and you wouldn’t have to wait for anything else to happen. Larry is working on that, Dominick has been away. Brent thought there needed to be some discussion about that. 5 Brents understanding is that the items that are already completed were offered as part of the project on the basis of the joint application we’d have to be willing to commit to all or none, Larry said that’s not correct. The City received money for specific projects as part of the joint application. Those were the project ready aspects. The 2 million that was already spent was an awful strong project ready part of the joint application and nobody else had 2 million spent. Lansing had a lot of planning in their report and you showed a lot of engineering. Brent said that based on the fact that you had already payed for it was the basis that for the local share. Larry interjected, projects since November of 1996 is the key. Any projects done subsequent to the passing of the bond act in November 1996, we are eligible for the state funding. Doesn’t matter that they were done, it mattered that they were done after the act was passed. Brent’s bottom line is irrelevant to the sematics of that. It is that we may not get all of the money we are asking for and if you spend some money on certain things now, Brent would just like to know that it is going to count to the total project. Dominick mentioned that we are trying to use this initial aspect of leverage to additional funding. Mary asked, when they deliver the money is there some sort of legal document... Larry said they will draw up a contract and sign it, which we have not signed contract 1 yet. We asked for 6 million for the interceptor costs and we are going to get 2 of that. Larry doesn’t see the problem in asking for the first 1.22 million for exactly what they told us we could have it for. Cathy said we have to spend it on that and if we don’t, then it will jeopardize us in getting more money in the future, so there really isn’t any other alternative. Brent said his answer is because when the come back and give me more money and when it’s less than what we’ve asked for, there may be a problem. Larry seems to have more insight in that the money awarded to specific projects in September 1998 will not change with the results of the second round of funding. 5. Staff Reports Skip for this meeting. 6. Financial Reports Nothing to report. 7. Old Business Nothing to report. 6 8. New Business Nothing to report. 9. Adjournment All were in favor!! Next regularly scheduled meeting is set for March 21st @ 12:30 PM. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEMARCH 21, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on March 21, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca *Mary Gutenberger, City of Ithaca *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca Gary Gleason, Chief Operator Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Jerry Hook, Stearns & Wheler Steve Thayer, Deputy Controller Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Steve Farkas, Town of Lansing David Herrick, TG Miller PC ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca Don Hartill, Village of Lansing Bill Gray, City Superintendent Susan Brock, Attorney Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Ron Anderson, Village of Cayuga Heights Brent Cross, Village of C.H. Engineer Cathy Valentino opened the meeting and informed who was there that there is not a quorum. But later there was a quorum. 1. Approval of February Minutes If Received Not received. 2 2. Updates on SEQR, if any Jerry informed the committee that a few comments came back on the Overview Document from the original planning group and we are trying to get the document finalized, a few things are still missing and then it will be redistributed. The things still missing are the planning areas and some general wording about the possible agreements. The other things that we did was prepare a request for qualifications for firms that are capable of doing the EIS. We have received some comments back on the RFQ. We would like to get it out by March 31, 2000. 3. Updates on DEC Items, if any Jerry informed the committee that the state to continue to function as the lead agency, needs the wastewater plant permit applications through DEC and so he would like to submit the SPDES permit modifications for the Cayuga Heights Plant and the IAWWTF. The draft permits are submitted to Larry, Cayuga Heights and Brent. We three met and agreed on what we should submit as a request for phosphorus limit 0.4 for IAWWTF and 0.5 for Cayuga Heights, and the state is going to be looking to get that. Right now they are acting as lead agency without any official application for permit. We did find that back in 1995, a request to upgrade to 13.1 MGD was submitted and we are pursuing that with the State right now. What we want to do is have them take action on that permit application. Basically we want to take the expansion of the plant of what has already been done out of this new SEQRA process. The new work will permit the phosphorus removal upgrade. We resubmitted to the State. They haven’t given the determination. They may be pushing it into a stress test of the final settling tanks that will pretty much be a formality. Larry added that he received a letter from Senator Seward reiterating his interest in the current Bond Act application. 4. Staff Reports Gary mentioned that at the SJS’s leisure, review the handout of the 1999 Annual Report. Larry also mentioned that he and Dan came to a draft 5 year plan on the interceptor. Larry expects that before to long we will be talking about it. Larry referred to the map on the wall, some improvements of which are tied up in the grant application also. These interceptor capital costs and O&M are to be shared by flow. 3 The draft map identifies up to 18 different lines through the City that services the Town of Ithaca or the Town of Dryden. Some of the lines from the north become crucial connections to the Cayuga Heights, Village of Lansing and the Town of Lansing. The good news is many of those parts we call Phase 1 of the Unified Plan are already built. We are just waiting to see what this Bond Act round brings us before we can concretely discuss final shares. Cathy asked if this was in the draft agreement, Larry said there was a part on interceptors. Dan mentioned that conceptually the 3 partners agreed. We need to figure out a final map and plan. Cathy said she would like to see an official copy of the draft map. Cathy would like Dan to put it on the next town board agenda. Larry said to excuse the inconsistences between what you see as Phase 1, 2, and 3 in the grant application and what the 3 of us including Dave Putnam drafted up as some projects were grouped for Bond Act funding and our discussions were focused on a rolling five year plan. Mary asked Larry what was the big issue for Dryden. Larry said we have been discussing percentages in general, of an interceptor budget as opposed to an individual apportionment for each of the 18 lines. As Larry pointed out, as an example, if you extend sewer out the developed part of Ellis Hollow as shown on the planning area map or the German Cross Road along Route 79, they are not currently service routes. But how do you try to figure out fair value for the Town line on Slaterville Road, or the City lines all the way back to the treatment plant. If we all share it in massy percentage flow, it is much more manageable from a budget point of view. It is more steady state without peaks and valleys of requests and budget impact. Larry said that in the 2000 Budget, we allocated money for a belt press and would like to move forward on it. Larry was absolutely positive that we would not see a penny of the money for the belt press out of the Bond Act grant money still to be announced. Larry just wanted a consensus to start getting the belt press purchase going. There was unanimous agreement to move forward. 5. Financial Report Steve said they are working on the 1999 Final Financial Report. He said there was also a rumor of SJS needing more financial information. If what Paige provides isn’t enough, let him know. Cathy thought that was appropriate, but a revenue account would be helpful. Steve will take care of that. On the amounts that are closed, Steve will have to provide 4 that also. 5 6. Old Business Cathy told Mark we were talking about the map for Dryden and we raised the question again about the Hanshaw Road and the DOT. Do you have any idea what may be going on with that? Mark said not much, but Barbara Blanchard wants it kept on the table, but she can’t currently ensure DOT going in there and the County isn’t making a commitment to all at that site yet. She has other sites she is looking at. Cathy’s next question is, for the purpose of the map for the unified joint sewer project, should we be including that area? Mark said it would be appreciated. Mark again mentioned that they wanted the DOT and the 911 facility together and 911 has a deadline, so the County may be moving to somewhere they can go right into. But, if it is in at least the impact analyses will be included. Jerry Hook said for SEQR it is better to include it now than not. Larry mentioned the boundaries on the map as shown did not include this area as it reflected current committee outcomes. Cathy thought maybe should this be discussed again with the other sewer meeting before the next scoping session. Mary thought so also. Cathy will contact Alan regarding this discussion and meeting. 7. New Business Nothing to report. 8. Adjournment All were in favor. Next regularly scheduled meeting is set for April 18th @ 12:30 PM. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEAPRIL 18, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on April18, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Charlie Hatfield, Town of Dryden Steve Thayer, Deputy Controller Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Don Hartill, Village of Lansing Dave Putnam, TG Miller Eng. ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca Bill Gray, City Superintendent Susan Brock, Attorney *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca Gary Gleason, Chief Operator-IAWWTF Cathy Valentino opened the meeting and informed who was there, that there was not a quorum. 1. Approval of February & March Minutes 2. Updates on SEQR, Cathy asked what updates if any were there. Larry said that depends on the SJS in terms of the complexity of SEQRA. One thought tells you with this modest amount of money, it could be simpler. The other thought tells you, you have to go through the process to be all inclusive. You really can’t scale down the process as it relates to the Lansings and Dryden without getting into the issue of segementing. It is worth a discussion before we go back to DEC about what areas already funded could be expedited, but that doesn’t leave a whole lot of time. The next meeting is the 29th. 2 3. Updates on Regional Planning Cathy said their last meeting they were waiting for Bill Gray to arrive. Don asked if there was any understanding where the grant money actually is. Larry said the Finger Lakes money is still there. The $1.2 million the City spent already, the city bonded long term through the EFC, so then the next question we asked, was, what additional interceptor work can be done. DEC said let’s meet with the EFC fiscal people and see how open minded they would be to utilize it for another part of the interceptor program. Larry handed out a follow up list of capital projects and costs for a five year interceptor program from last month. It is a draft that goes with the interceptor maps Larry sent everyone. Larry thought maybe we could use this money already granted for interceptor replacement, but DEC didn’t know exactly how to go about it. Some of this work has nothing to do with the SEQR issues related to expanding the suggested area the plant would serve. Dominick said he would explore the transfer the grant money versus the borrowed money. Dominick thinks it could be worked out. 4. Updates on DEC Items, if any Larry reported that he, Gary, Bill & Jerry Hook had a meeting with NYSDEC on Friday the 14th. One point of the meeting was the rerating of this plant. DEC did find that we went through SEQRA. So that issue is put to rest. The rest of the meeting was about what protocol DEC wants us to follow in terms of stress testing this plant. What that involves is, taking down 2 of the 4 final tanks and matching it with the flow that is roughly half of what we might experience in a peak event. So that we can prove half of that flow, going through half of our capacity is treated adequately. Currently, Ron and his staff are taking care of things. We will be going through a 2 week stress test period starting next Monday, April 24, 2000. DEC wants 7-8 different criteria’s sampled. We had a quick agreement on what they want us to monitor. Then DEC outlined that we would submit that data, they would review it, send it to their people in Albany, come back and make a determination or rerating. It would have a 30-60 day public review, at that point, roughly a 4-5 month process overall. In regard to the announcement of the $4.1 million of Bond Act Funds, Tara from DEC handed out a sheet of her best estimate of what monies we have been awarded to date. DEC’s explanation of the 4.1 million, is the money already committed earlier by the governor in September 1998 and not what we call additional monies awarded. Larry said we got $7.4 million in the first place, but they resolved all of that by Tara’s handout at $7.5 million. 3 4 That is quite a disappointment from where we thought we were headed. We gave them the press releases, the backup from Albany, but it didn’t seem to make a difference. Frank asked what items weren’t covered. Larry said we didn’t get the additional money for phosphorus removal, the interceptor work, those are the 2 biggest missing pieces. Cathy asked Larry if we are still going to achieve a better phosphorus rate, Larry said, he can’t tell us on the money side yet, but when we submitted the grant, it was for $6.5 million for phosphorus removal. That was the total budget including engineering for phosphorus removal. Roxie goes up twice a week to Onondaga County who is doing a pilot phosphorus project. The most promising method so far is a lot less expensive than the filtering method we built the grant proposal around. They use sand to coagulate and the weight drops it out a lot quicker. Which means we could do everything we need to do in one phostrip tank. Bill and Larry stopped and saw the project after the Friday meeting. Bill and Larry believe they can create a revised budget, substantially less. Cathy asked, with the revised budget, where does that leave us with the partnership deal. Larry said the rerating gives you the tool to talk about the larger service area driving the SEQRA process. So we expect within 4-5 months to be rerated, unless we find out something in the next month with the stress test. Frank asked the 3.1 million increase, how long would it be before we actually need to use it. Larry said we are not close to needing it yet. The current plant rating is 10.1 for 30 day maximum average flow, but 25 mgd hydraulic load. Our average flow is 7.5; our highest 30 day max has been 9.2 mgd if you ignore the runoff event that affected all of Upstate New York in January 1996. 5. Updates on Intermunicipal Agreement Revision Cathy said they are now meeting every Monday and working through the draft agreement that Susan Brock put together for us. 6. Staff Reports - Larry will be meeting with Jerry Hook to work on the belt press specifications. Larry also mentioned that there was also mix-up during the budget process regarding the belt press project. The belt press was the 1 thing specified for the total amount of the capital project, so if you look at Gary’s budget, there is $208,500 of other capital items that we approved. So we will specify and bid the belt press, establish a firm budget and a number for that item and then clarify the City budget to include the SJS capital items. Gary and Larry believe the total dollar amount $630,000 will be the same for the combined projects. 5 7. Financial Report Steve handed out a 2000 budget update as of the end of March, shows revenue, budget, balances, capital reserve balance. Cathy asked that people review at their leisure. 8. Old Business 9. New Business *Susan Brock Letter Larry explained that Susan will be the sole proprietor and needs a signature on a letter of engagement. It is just a change in who the check gets made payable to. Each municipality should sign it per Dominick Cafferillo. Larry will take and give to Alan to sign at the DEC meeting Friday, April 28th. 10. Adjournment All were in favor @ 1:30 pm. Next regularly scheduled meeting is set for May16th @ 12:30 PM. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEMAY 16, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on May 16, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Mary Gutenberger, City of Ithaca *Charles Hatfield, Town of Dryden Don Hartill, Village of Lansing Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Steve Thayer, Deputy City Controller Gary Gleason, Chief Operator @ IAWWTF ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden Steve Farkas, Town of Lansing Ron Anderson, Village of Cayuga Heights *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Bill Gray, City Superintendent Brent Cross, Village of Cayuga Heights Engineer David Herrick, TG Miller PC Frank opened the meeting and informed who was there, that there was not a quorum. 1. Approval of February & March & April Minutes 2. Updates on SEQR, if any 3. Updates on Regional Planning 4. Updates on DEC Items, if any 5. Updates on Intermunicipal Agreement Revision 2 6. Staff Reports - 7. Financial Report 8. Old Business 9. New Business 10. Adjournment Next regularly scheduled meeting is set for 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEAUGUST 22, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on August 22, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Mary Gutenberger, City of Ithaca *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Steve Thayer, Deputy City Controller *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca Dave Putnam, Town of Dryden Engineer *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Bill Gray, City Super. Gary Gleason, Chief Operator WWTF 1. Report on May Minutes; Approve Feb, Mar, April Larry brought up that he would like to prepare summary minutes based on our memory for the May meeting, because the recorder was not functioning properly. All in all there was no objection to doing this. 2. Review Budget for Year 2001 Larry reported that Gary and Ron have pretty much prepared the explanations for the budget in terms of major items. Jose is here to speak about anything to do with the Lab or Watershed. Cathy asked what created the increases. Larry explained the situation with the sludge disposal and change in the hauler. The sludge disposal fees are in question again for the time being. The City of Auburn has built an incinerating facility that can accommodate 400% of their needs. So they need customers to achieve the scale. They are currently going through their start-up period and experimenting with different people’s sludges and what is left after you burn it. Gary has talked in the past that we have well digested sludge, so when we send it to Auburn there tends to be more ash left as a percent of what we send in tonage wise, then somebody like Oswego that brings in undigested sludge. 2 2. Con’t They are just trying to get a handle of what the true costs are both in the energy it takes to burn and how much ash is left to dispose of. Because they need to landfill the ash when done. Auburn has their own landfill for the City of Auburn and they have recently gotten into a contract to recover gas from that landfill. If they are able to generate gas that is usable in the incinerator operation, then it could greatly lower the costs for everyone. It is more of an experimental period right now. We are currently hauling to that facility and they are charging us $34 per ton. Our carrier who when we don’t haul they do, they are charging a $2.50 surcharge on what goes to Auburn. It is their way of guaranteeing us space at the landfill, when we can’t take it to Auburn. As it relates to next years budget, we still don’t know if we are landfilling or incinerating. $49.50/ton if we landfill (WeCare hauls), $36.50 up to $40 or so/ton for incineration (IAWWTF hauls). The letter of intent by We Care (sludge hauler) was handed out. There were questions about the sludge disposal item. Mary Russell’s concern is the emissions of incineration in the Auburn area. Larry offered getting more information about the facility. We will come back for approval at the October meeting along with the next phase of the budget. We’ll have the water and sewer consumption and our outside revenue and outside community figures. Dominick has received the Town of Dryden consumption figures and is waiting for the Town of Ithaca figures. Dominick will have the debt service components when we bring the next phase forward. 3. Review of Sludge Disposal System, Short Term, & Long Term RFP Larry reviewed this item in the budget portion of the agenda. We are kind of in a predicament with this hauling situation. Larry is recommending that we continue with the experiment with Auburn and learn more about their “business” and as a result of that we would write an RFQ for the future hauling contract anticipating that’s probably the start with 2001. This proposal, in letter form, is the way we would handle sludge disposal for the interim, $36.50 per ton if we haul it to the City of Auburn or WeCare hauls it to the Seneca Meadows Landfill for $49/ton. Larry is hoping for this approval on some way of hauling the balance of the year, knowing we are going to have a RFQ, for the future. The future does not have to be incineration. Cathy has no objections to going with this experimental period right now. Neither did anyone else. 4 4. Review of Watershed Management Efforts Larry briefly explained that the Town of Ledyard has been heading up all of Cayuga Lakes Network efforts. There seems to be a little bit going on in the Town of Ledyard that leads Jose to bring a proposal to this group for an alternative to that. Jose in brief explained the issue with the Town of Ledyard being such a large project in the Town scheme of things. Cathy asked why wouldn’t the County be asked to be the lead agency instead of the City of Ithaca. Larry said it’s more like sponsoring , it seemed more logical, for the SJS to consider first given the County history on following through on Watershed improvements. Ed Hershey mentioned the advantage of being in a position to safeguard our interests at the south end of the lake. Frank thought that Tompkins County would be better at being the lead agency, due to the fact of phosphorus problem being a sticky point for the IAWWTF. Cathy asked if the SJS approved this, where would it go then. It would go to Common Council. Cathy agrees with Ed that we have a real vested interest. Cathy is willing to have this go forward to Common Council. The rest of the voting members were in favor of it going to Common Council. Ed does feel we need to know what the surrounding areas are putting into the lake. We know what we are putting into our lake. 5. Status Report on Belt Press Bidding Larry reported that this is a capital project budgeted item for 2000. We now have almost the final spec to go out to bid. Once we tie up this item then we can move on to the balance of the capital project items for 2000. We are working with Stearns & Wheler on the bid specs. The specs are being prepared more like a contract, with a warrantee, insurance on transportation etc. 6. Updates on Regional Planning, DEC Items, Intermunicipal Agreements, Short Term Diversion, etc. Larry reported that the regional planning group, 6 municipalities, meets roughly once a month. It is the group that is working through the scope of the EIS that is going to be prepared for the regional wastewater plan. The makeup of the regional wastewater plan in some people’s mind is anticipated to be a partnership of 6 municipalities and others think of 5 municipalities plus Cayuga Heights owning and operating their own plant. 5 6. Con’t There has been a lot of forward movement in terms of resolutions of the issues that need to be finalized, perfected, or included in the revised agreement for these 3 parties. So those discussions about the Intermunicipal agreement follow directly into what we are thinking on at the regional level. Once this group here perfects a revised Intermunicipal agreement, then it is anticipated that will provide the frame work for the regional planning group to expand the contract to 5 or 6 parties. We have been meeting with DEC since the beginning of the year, to decide on the issues that need to be studied in terms of the environmental impact for the regional idea of serving the expanded Town of Lansing and a larger area of the Town of Dryden, all of the Village of Lansing, additional area’s in the Town of Ithaca beyond what this facility currently is serving, possibly parts of the Village of Cayuga Heights and naturally the City is fully contained. DEC was initially hammering back at us about the capacity. We made a lot of positive ground with them to identify the parts of the programs which are already completed. We are at the 11th hour of getting the 13.1 mgd of capacity rated for this facility. The regional people have signed off on it, the Albany people have, in a way, signed off on it. They need to sit down and write the actual permit. Then there will be a public review period that is 30-60 days. If that public review period passes without a whole lot of input or controversy then the permit will go into affect and we will be rated for 13.1 mgd. In parallel with that, Larry met with DEC and we are making progress on applying for reimbursement of the funds that already have been granted to interceptor work. We now have a total of $1.7 million in grants and Larry has been meeting with Tara to work out the details of the application that would get us that reimbursement. There is the issue of can we shift some of the money to future work. EFC hasn’t come to any conclusions yet. We could just get the money and retire the bonds, but we don’t really want to do that at 2.8%. So there is some discussions that need to go on to convince the financial entity that this is all a part of the big interceptor program. Short term diversion was a topic of discussion this morning. There was some attempt to take the choke hold off the Village of Lansing. Larry’s understanding is, currently the Village of Lansing has no more sewer permits to give. Cayuga Heights doesn’t feel they are in a position to give them any more. That gets confused by the fact that Cayuga Heights figures their reserves based on the zoning of different commercial properties in the Village of Lansing. Cayuga Heights will rate a property for their need for sewer. For example, the Pyramid Mall site, Cayuga Heights may say they need to reserve 50 units and Lansing will only use 26, so though the rest of the units may still be available, Cayuga Heights won’t let the Village of Lansing use those units elsewhere in the Village. TheVillage of Lansing is going to go back to the Village of Cayuga Heights and try to convince them one more time. 6 6. Con’t Those are pretty much the highlights. It is all progress. We have the latest packet from DEC for the next round of applications. They just came in the mail the other day and are due back October 31, 2000. The whole basis of the bas plan is solid. Six municipalities should at least be to the point of agreement and all stand behind the joint application for additional funds. There is pretty much agreement on a base program in the amount of $7.4 million of requested additional State Aide. Larry is trying to be optimistic and say that wherever the negotiations and discussions go, that need for projects and funds is pretty much common to whatever scenario falls out of it all. If we meet again in September, we will have a more concrete explanation of what that package would be for your endorsement and take it back to your respective municipalities for a resolution and support at your meetings in October. The guts of what we have asked for, Stearns and Wheler has been helping us through as a facilitator through all of this and pretty much has outlined. We have $1.4 million for the phosphorus, we need roughly another $1.3 to fund a total phosphorus removal project at this facility. So we are saying to the State, if you gives us that additional $1.3, we’ll move ahead with the total phosphorus job. That is the result of our piloting with Onondaga County from which we revised the budget and the technology that will treat the total 13.1 mgd as a maximum monthly number, and would treat as much as 30 mgd on a hydraulic event. That is basically, saying this technology put in one of phosphorus stripping tanks will treat all of the flows. Cayuga Heights under the same proposal would put in their own filter for phosphorus if they got funding, we are asking for roughly another million and a half dollars for interceptor work for interceptor work if we make that application and the Lansings would ask for another million and a half dollars for their sewers. It is a pretty balanced package of requests that we are going after for an additional $7.4 million in Bond Acts Funds, if we can reach an agreement to make that application by October 31st. Larry has tried to dwell on things you have heard already either once today or recently. 7. Staff Reports Larry reported on Gary’s health condition. Ron, Jose and Jeff are proceeding with keeping things in line at the facility. 8. Financial Report Dominick handed out the status report of the plant rerating project that Cathy requested from Dominick. 9. Old Business 7 Nothing to report. 10. New Business Nothing to report. 11. Adjournment Meeting adjourned 2:05 pm. Next regularly scheduled meeting will be September 26, 2000. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEESEPTEMBER 26, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on September 26, 2000, at 12:30, at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, 525 Third Street; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Mary Gutenberger, City of Ithaca Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Steve Thayer, Deputy City Controller *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden Charlie Hatfield, Town of Dryden *Cathy Valentino, Town of Ithaca Bill Gray, City Superintendent Gary Gleason, IAWWTF Chief Operator ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca *Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Engineer There is not a quorum to make a motion of approval. 1. Cathy started the meeting off regarding her conversation with Sylvia and the City taking the lead for the Cayuga Lake I/O. She is very eager for the City of Ithaca to become the lead agency and it would really move the project forward. Cathy said she felt very comfortable with the situation after speaking with Sylvia. 2. Budget 2000 Review Dominick handed out the 2 options available for approval. 2 Dominick said we didn’t adjust the operating budget substantially. The two line items in the operating budget that have been changed thus far is line #435-Contractual Services increased to $313,769-due to the labor wages increasing and #499-sludge disposal decreased to $231,000. If we do run into trouble with our sludge disposal, we’ll have to use a portion of the contingency, which is on page 2, which is $50,000. This is similar to what we did last year. We do not know exactly what that cost per ton is going to be, but rather than increase the budget, we will cover it with contingency. We haven’t used the contingency in recent memory. Other than that, we did not change the treatment plant expenditure portion of the budget. On page 1 of the revenues, option #1-the septage hauling outside revenue was left at $200,000. In looking at the year-to-date figure we seem to be running slightly behind. However, investment interest rates are higher. The shared payments from the City and the Towns which are based on usage, are another component of income that is holding steady. Cathy asked Dominick how he figures the interest payment, debt service. Dominick said we pay it out of the City’s part and charge back. Bill had a few questions about the #225 account, Other Equipment. He was inquiring about the $34,000 increase. Gary explained the 4 wheel drive truck with plow and hazard materials transportation. Bill asked if $10,000 would be enough of an increase for utilities. Gary thought so. Dominick mentioned that this will be a recommendation to the BPW. Cathy posed the question to the partners - the possibility of allocating a fairly substantial amount of fund balance next year or would we rather allocate a lesser amount of fund balance next year and have the extra be in the rate differential. The other question being, should we pass the rate increase onto our customers. Cathy said she needs to go back and look at her budget figures. Dominick said the actual rate gets set the first of November. Cathy will have hers done by the 15th. Dominick said this budget will go to Council in October. Cathy asked why we didn’t have any capital projects this year. It was pointed out that we do have a list of projects, attached to the original submitted budget. The meeting was adjourned. 1 SPECIAL JOINT SUBCOMMITTEEOCTOBER 31, 2000 A regular meeting of the Special Joint Subcommittee was held on October 31, 2000, at 12:30, at the Town of Ithaca; Town Hall; Ithaca, New York PRESENT: *Mary Russell, Town of Ithaca *Cathy Valentine, Town of Ithaca Dominick Cafferillo, City Controller Larry Fabbroni, Asst. Super W & S Steve Thayer, Deputy City Controller Dan Walker, Town of Ithaca Ed Hershey, City of Ithaca ABSENT: *Joseph Leonardo, City of Ithaca *Frank Liguori, Town of Ithaca *Alan Cohen, City of Ithaca *Mary Gutenberger, City of Ithaca *Mark Varvayanis, Town of Dryden Bill Gray, City Superintendent Gary Gleason, C.O. IAWWTF There is not a quorum to make a motion of approval. There was no agenda so the following is a recap of the minutes per the tape. Cathy said that she asked Dominick which option 1 or 2 was in the City Budget. Dominick replied with Option #2, which leaves the rate the same as the previous year, which uses more fund balance. Dominick added that it gives the other municipalities the option of handling their overall rate as they chose. We chose to increase our rate, which will contribute more to the collection system capital reserve and pay less to the joint activity and will in turn use more fund balance to balance the wastewater treatment plant budget. 2 Mary asked about the Return To General Fund line, what is that for exactly. Dominick said a percentage of allocation for various services; Payroll, Human Resources, legal services, etc, distribution of various overhead costs at a percentage. This all includes a fair percentage of the cost of operating and maintaining our computer system and network. The prime reason for the percentage increase, was an expansion of the Human Resource Department of 3 positions and the Information Technology Department of 2 positions. Dominick will furnish a printout. The overhead costs are shared by the Fire Department, Youth Bureau, Water & Sewer, Joint Activity etc. All of the non-general fund activities or the activities that are shared beyond the City. Mary also questioned the salary for the Landscape Planner and how it benefits the Town. Larry replied that the position was revised to an Environmental Analyst and is in final Civil Service evaluations & involved with both critical science watershed activities and Lab support. Presently roughly 40% of the salary is being charged to the Water Treatment Plant Payroll. Cathy thought there should be some kind of agreement for the percentage of the positions that the work in the different facilities. Cathy also thought for any employee who has their salary broke out with different departments, be shown. Cathy asked where she would find the revenue on the charge out of the Landscape Planners time. Larry and Dominick explained that the weekly payroll charges the appropriate water or sewer account. Larry noted that this position is fully funded in the Joint Activity Budget; however; the deliberate process of water merger has left daily lab work to cover at the Water Plant. For 2000 and 2001, the effects of the Joint Activity Budget carrying part of a full time professional and seasonal lab help is a net earnings. Dominick said we are going to spend less of the appropriations. At the actual time it is charged out 50% here and 50% somewhere, then the actual expense is going to be less. It will not be seen on the revenue sheets. Cathy said that when she looked through the annual report, she noticed that there were bonds expiring May 15, 2006 and interceptor bonds that are expiring 2017, is that right. Larry said, some of that is the original debt to the plant, Dominick spoke up and said Cathy might be looking at the retirement debt service beginning 1992, which is 15 years. Again, Cathy would like a break down of what debts are outstanding and the payment schedules. Dominick indicated this is always available and has been provided from time to time. Mary had a question on the capital projects items - driveway blacktop sealing. Larry said that was for the overall oil and stone treatment, a 10 year improvement, to seal the asphalt which has aged since 1987. Cathy would like breakouts for the Return to General Fund, percentages of people’s salaries as close as you can estimate it and the bonds and a repayment schedule. Dominick 3 mentioned that the Return to General Fund is a once a year charge, whereas the salaries for direct work of operation are allocated on a weekly basis. Cathy mentioned that she was pleased to go with Option #2. The meeting was adjourned @ 12:37 p.m.