THE CITY OF
101 NORTH COURT STREET
UTILITY COMMITTEE
Minutes
2:00 p.m.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006, City Hall – Board Room
Aldermen Present: Alderman Imhoff (acting chair); Alderman Koontz.
City Staff Present: Kenny Shapiro, Assistant City
Attorney;
Citizens/Representatives Present: None.
Alderman Imhoff noted that he had received a note from Alderman Hall stating that she did not have any corrections to the April minutes, and that since Alderman Koontz had been present at the April meeting, a vote could be taken.
Alderman Koontz moved to approve the minutes. Alderman Imhoff seconded the motion and the minutes were unanimously approved.
Item 2: Discussion
of a request by
There
were no representatives present for this request.
Alderman
Imhoff referenced the letter in the agenda packet which indicated that E.coli
had been detected in their raw, untreated water, following rainfall
events.
In
response to questions posed by Alderman Imhoff it was noted that this property
is now located within
Mr.
Brown noted that there is a water main at the back of the property which the
applicant could pay to have run to the appropriate location on the property to
tap into the City’s lines.
Alderman
Imhoff stated that since the property is in the City, the City generally wants
businesses to tap into city water and is attempting to remove wells.
Mr.
Brown noted that the annexation agreement for this property would have to be
checked. He clarified that if a property
within the City had a failing well, then the property is eligible to tap into
the City’s water system. The applicant
must follow the proper procedures to obtain all approvals needed and would be
responsible for all costs incurred for making the water connection. The adjacent area is on County sewer and this
property would most likely be required to hookup to County sewer if allowed to
connect to City water. The applicant would be responsible for
preparing plans and making all required submittals.
Alderman
Imhoff felt this case should be moved forward as it is a matter of health,
safety, and general welfare.
Mr.
Brown stated that the white house (ceramic shop) nearby would probably follow
suit and request City water as well.
Alderman
Koontz made a motion to move this request forward for acceptance contingent
upon the applicant being responsible for following the proper procedures and
obtaining all necessary approvals.
Alderman Imhoff seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Item 3: Discussion
of a request by Sprint Nextel to modify existing lease and place antennas and
an equipment shelter on the
The
applicant for this project contacted the City earlier today and requested a
continuance.
Alderman
Imhoff stated that he was confused about the number of antennas and towers
being requested.
Mr.
Brown stated that he, Mr. Keegin, and Engineering Department representatives
had met with Nextel and advised Nextel of their comments and concerns regarding
the request. Currently Nextel is
utilizing double the amount of space originally allocated. The applicant had been advised to submit revised
drawings and additional information for the request.
It
was noted that Nextel’s original contact
had left Nextel’s employment. The case
had been dropped. Nextel merged with
Sprint. Then, the current request (in
packet) was received from Ms. Crawford.
Mr. Stevenson, Nextel, contacted the City and requested a continuance in
order to allow Nextel time to obtain drawings.
Announcements:
Alderman
Imhoff noted that Alderman Hall had emailed the committee to suggest discussing
the elimination of the Utilities Committee meetings from the docket.
Alderman
Imhoff noted that the Utility Committee is a recommending body, and items must
still be approved by the Mayor and Board.
Alderman Hall had suggested that it may be possible to handle items at a
staff level and utilize the Committee for appeals only.
Mr.
Connatser noted that water bills were his main concern. Mr. Brown noted that he has the authority to
adjust the sewer portion of bills.
However, he does not have the authority to make adjustments to the water
bills. If the Utility Committee is
abolished, then water bills would have to be heard at Mayor and Board
meetings.
Mr.
Brown suggested holding Utility Committee meetings on an agenda-driven
basis. Once four or five items are
received, a meeting should be scheduled.
Alderman
Imhoff suggested a quarterly meeting format and utilizing the committee as more
of an appeals board.
Mr.
Keegin stated that he felt it was important that concerns and any conditions of
approval be heard at the earliest stage instead of waiting until just prior to
approvals at Mayor and Board meetings.
Alderman
Koontz noted that an item such as a lease agreement could considerably lengthen
Mayor and Board meetings. He noted that
in certain circumstances, items need to be heard prior to the Mayor and Board
meeting. However, he noted that less
frequent meetings would be possible.
Alderman
Imhoff noted that anything dealing with legal documents should be heard by the
Utility Committee. Individual homeowner
requests for water billing issues should be handled at staff level with appeals
going before Utility Committee.
Alderman
Koontz expressed concern about putting unnecessary stress/burden on staff. For example, where is the line drawn
determining what decisions are to be made by staff and which ones by elected
officials.
Alderman
Imhoff requested that everyone consider the pros and cons regarding the current
Utility Committee process and email Sarah Stamper, Engineering Secretary, with
comments prior to the August 22, 2006 meeting.
Ms. Stamper will compile the information and forward to all
members.
Mr.
Lankford expressed concern about delaying a request (ie. if the project has a
deadline) if there is no set meeting schedule for the Utility Committee.
There
being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
Next
meeting: Tuesday, August 22, 2006.