MANAGER’S  REPORT
For City Council Meeting
Tuesday, August 5, 2008

TO:  Mayor Walter Ash Jr. and Honorable Members of Belfast City Council
FROM:  Joseph J. Slocum
 DATE:  Friday, August 1, 2008 

Non-Agenda Items:

1. Flags and CMP Utility Poles
I spoke with Peggy Cummings of Central Maine Power to better understand CMP’s contract requirements which would govern the City’s ability to hang anything from their poles.  

First they wanted 2 million dollars in general liability and automobile liability insurance. The City has only a million dollar insurance coverage. I should point out that City liability is governed by a special State law called the Maine Tort Claims Act. This act provides immunity to the State, Municipalities, School’s, Water Districts, Counties, etc. for a broad variety of common accidents even if the governing entity was otherwise negligent. The law is very much like a free pass on liability. In the very limited areas where the State has indicated that municipalities do not have automatic immunity the City could be exposed to a claim of liability but that exposure is capped at $400,000. That’s the maximum amount of recovery unless- the City elects on its own-- to secure more insurance coverage, in which case the higher limit reflected in the coverage will be the statutory cap on exposure. 

CMP has found out that most municipalities in Maine do not have coverage in excess of the $400,000 tort liability exposure so they are currently redrafting their agreements to reflect a lower limit. Presently they would accept our million dollar insurance coverage. 

That brings us to the recent issue involving American flags showing up on utility poles everywhere.  

There is no language in the contract drafted for municipalities that reflects CMP’s corporate policy that they will not allow any individual; or group to hang anything from their utility poles without first getting the expressed approval from the municipality. CMP never says yes if the municipality does not also say yes. 

If the municipality does approve of the request then CMP does expect the City‘s insurance to cover again a risk of injury or other loss caused by the approved activity. 

As a practical matter our insurance will never cover the activities of non-city employees using non-city owned vehicles who are NOT conducting City business in the course and scope of their duties for the City. Hence we can’t give to CMP the very protection they are looking for. 

CMP poles are utility poles not bulletin boards. People are so accustomed to them they treat them like they are public property even though they are really private property. Portland had a big issue several years ago with yellow ribbons on poles and the Council finally decided they were not going to approve putting anything on them. 

The present status of the flags on the poles in Belfast is that they are up with out either the permission of the City or the utilities.  Since we can’t ensure the actions of others there is nothing we can do to change this status. While there’s nothing to stop CMP from signing an agreement directly with the VFW, I would think CMP would still want the insurance from the VFW. 

I can pursue signing an agreement on behalf of the City which would cover the Christmas lights which are the only City run activity run from these poles all year. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.

2.  Working Waterfront Plan
The Harbor Committee has identified a Working Waterfront Plan for Belfast. This is in response to a request to preserve the working Waterfront, which came out of the Leadership and Action Summit last spring. A copy is included in your packet. This is a recommended policy statement that reflects a preference for limiting condominium development and large marina development since “such projects serve to diminish the areas available for commercial uses and eliminate public access” I asked the Harbor Committee how this related to the previously approved Stinson Project and they said this was a post Stinson Project Policy. I took that to mean that the prior residential and marina concept for Stinson was still intact. 

3. Waterfront Walkway Grant
We did not win funding for the Waterfront Walkway improvement.  The State had $1.5 million to hand out and there were requests of over $7,000,000. We will have to revert to a Plan B to build something that’s workable for now that can be enhanced in the future.  

4. City Debt and City Debt Service
At budget time we provided Council with a list of all City borrowings and identified both annual payments and also when each loan would expire. I am attaching a revised Debt Service Schedule. The new schedule reflects lower balances that are due which reflects annual payments. Please let me know if you have any questions. 

5. Assessment Note
During the budget process there was some discussion with the Assessor about when the next revaluation might occur. October 2008 was mentioned as a possible date. Since then City Assessor Bob Whiteley has completed his review of the ration between assessed values and sale values and concluded that we are within acceptable State ranges of value and we will NOT need to think about a revaluation this fall.  

6. Oak Hill Drainage Culvert Project
We will be replacing the large culvert under the road in the next few weeks. Upon my recommendation we signed contracts calling for a concrete culvert instead of a metal one to secure greater life expectancy. Since then our contractor’s concrete pipe supplier has been overrun with demand because of the bankruptcy of Gagne Concrete. A month ago our concrete pipe was scheduled to be here on August 11^th so we could install it during the driest part of the summer and get the road re-opened before school. It was a good plan but Belfast is not an island and the bankruptcy of one of the largest concrete manufacturers in the state has caused at a minimum a month delay in getting our concrete pipe. This exposed us to closed roads after school started and a more difficult job with fall rains. I have thus reversed my recommendation and ordered an aluminum culvert to get the job done on time. This will save $50,000 in material cost. I did receive a lot of flak from aluminum pipe suppliers after selecting concrete claiming a 75-year life expectancy on their pipe. I am comfortable with these changes in both materials and price. The pipe is being supplied by a Belfast supplier. We expect the road to be closed for about one week starting on August 11^th and there will be signage and notices to neighbors. 

Agenda Items:
11.C  Discussion and action on formal transfer of ownership of the Parks & Recreation bus to the Waldo County YMCA.  I proposed this as part of this year’s budget. I felt that the time and money required to manage and run this bus was not worth the benefit it delivered to our parks or their programs. Much of the bus activity had nothing to do with the parks or their programs. I did however want to see the vehicle continue to provide a benefit to the Belfast Community. We looked into giving the bus to the school but it does not meet their criteria. The largest user over the last 2 years was the YMCA so I proposed the transfer to them. Perhaps they will consider renting out to others to help defray their cost in maintaining this vehicle as we tried to do. I do note that the school will rent a bus out if we ever need one. I do not support to sell the bus out-right as government sales never produce market value-just look at our recent foreclosure sales. People bid at government sales looking for a bargain. I am asking for your approval to sign the title over to the YMCA.  

11.D Discussion and action on a recommendation by the Friends of Belfast Parks for the adoption of regulations for the Dog Park at Walsh Field.  These regulations are fairly close to the ones outlined in the written presentation made by the Friends of Belfast Parks when they secured approval to create the Park from City Council. The authority to create and impose Parks rules rests with the Council. I have asked the Parks and Recreation Commission Chair to seek out the recommendation of her Commission and to report that recommendation to you. I hope that either she or a Commission member will be present at your meeting. There will be representatives of the Friends of Belfast Parks at the meeting.  (Green) 

11.E  Discussion and action on Public Works Salt Bids.  Wow who wants to think about road salt now? The bids will be here for your review and I thank Bob Richards and Denise Beckett for making sure this important annual detail is taken care of.  (Gray) 

11.F  Discussion and action on the bids for a new ambulance.  The numbers of Ambulance calls have increased markedly over the last 5 years. Belfast also provides Ambulance Service for a fee to five other towns in Waldo County. They are Waldo, Swanville, Morrill, Northport and Belmont. Our two ambulances went out on 2,055 calls in 2007 and logged in over 42,000 miles between them. These are critical emergency response vehicles and the wear on them is very hard. The ambulance being replaced is a 2003 Vehicle with 115,000 miles on it.  Fire Chief Jim Richards added to the base price of the vehicle a new Stryker cot and Stryker chair, which were much, needed to ensure safe patient handling and transport. We believe that we save money by rolling these purchases together. The Chief has written a recommendation, which reports that they received five bids ranging from $105,000 to $142,212. I concur with his recommendation to go with the lowest bid.  (Cherry) 

11. Discussion and possible action of the request of the Performance/Community Center Committee.  Following the discussion with the City Council at its meeting of July 15^th, committee members reported that the Council made clear that they were interested in seeing a business plan for such a Center.  Council also indicated that the committee could help create a business plan by hiring an outside consultant with the financial resources City Council set aside in the 2008-09 budget.  

The committee discussion recognized that even with a business plan in hand, the Council or any future Council might be unsure on how to proceed for lack of broad based citizen input on the issue. 

The approach of the upcoming Presidential election was identified as a unique opportunity to package together an updated knowledge of what a Center might cost with an opportunity for the elected officials to hear from the community to what their feelings were- about pursuing a Community Center with tax dollars.

Committee members expressed the view that advisory referendums offered the opportunity to educate the community about the broad possibilities and benefits such a Community Center might bring as well as to engage the broader community into a dialogue that would help define future efforts. 

There was general agreement that the committee should immediately proceed on two interconnected tracks. 

First, ask the Council for the ability to sole source or handpick a consultant who has both the ability and the time to promptly provide the Belfast community with a business plan for community and Council consideration. A sub group of the committee would work to identify three scenarios of what a Community Center might actually be and develop a scope of services for the consultant to produce a separate business plan for each scenario. 

Secondly, ask the City Council to place two advisory referendums on the November 2008 ballot. The first would inquire whether the voters supported the idea of the City working with non-profit entities to actually develop a Community Center. The second question would ask the voters whether they would support the City using significant City funds to make this happen. The actual wording is not available at this time. The committee is looking for a commitment to put these issues on the ballot before that work is pursued. 

This is an ambitious undertaking given time constraints. The key will be whether we can get a consultant to provide us with clear financial information before people go to the polls to address the advisory referendum questions. Those questions also need to be clear to improve the credibility of the results.  

11.H  Discussion on a proposed Charter Amendment that would allow citizen petition to overturn a Zoning Change made by City Council.  A few years ago the City voted to remove the ability of the citizens to change zoning by citizen petition. This action had two consequences. First the citizens could not create or initiate changes to the zoning laws by themselves. Secondly, if the City council enacted a change to the zoning laws that, for some reason was repugnant to the general will of the citizenry, then that citizenry could not petition to reverse the changes made by their elected leaders. 

As discussions of “Recall” came up this year, comment has been made that the only remedy to a zoning change that was thought to be repugnant to the will of the citizenry was to in fact pursue a recall. Some suggested that there was no way to separate the change in the law from the individual people who supported that change. 

There has been some discussion within the Council that perhaps the City should consider allowing the citizenry the opportunity to petition to overturn a zoning change made by the Council but to keep in force the prohibition about citizens writing their own zoning initiatives into law. This matter is on the agenda for discussion. This would involve a Charter change made by the voters. If a majority of Council wants this on the November ballot we will get the City Attorney to draft the appropriate language. 

11.I Discussion and possible action on having appointed rather than elected  Warden and Ward clerks. I completely support this proposal from the City Clerk Roberta Fogg. I have spoken with Bobbi and she will discuss this with you at he meeting.  

11.J  Discussion about using city funds to improve sewer and road surface on Cedar Lane Extension, under the authority of an easement.  Last summer we went to check our records on this small section of road, which we have maintained for 40 to 50 years at least. To our surprise we realized that we did not own the road. I consulted with the City Attorney who advised that while we did not own it we had over time established a public easement over the road, which provides us with the right but not the obligation to maintain those uses. The road and the sewer lines are two of those uses. 

The money we were going to use to fix the sewer line and repave the road came from the State Revolving Loan Fund SRF Program which requires either ownership or the existence of a public easement for the money to be spent this way. Our engineers have shared our City Attorney’s legal opinion and they have cleared us to use this money to do this work. However, they have also suggested that they will have to prepare new bid documents and we should see the results of the forthcoming Combined Sewer Overflow study to confirm the priority of this work. 

If the priority is still there then I will recommend at your next meeting that we do this work as we always intended. If not then I will recommend that we find a way to repave the road and I think I can locate the funds to do that. The road was torn up by the Belfast Water District in good faith reliance on our plan to put in a new sewer line and repave the road. We all believed we owned the road.  In either case we should repave the road, the only outstanding question is should this be the section of sewer line we replace. 

11.K  Update by the City Manager on Belfast Master Plan for addressing Combined Sewer Overflows.  This is not an exciting topic but it does impact City expenses and the expenses of our City businesses and residents.  Belfast has spent a lot of money in recent years and is currently paying down a lot of debt to separate and upgrade various sections of our sewer lines to eliminate infiltration of storm or ground water and to minimize the possibility of an unwanted overflow into the sea. We have accomplished significant improvement, at a high cost over a relatively short period of time. We are presently preparing a State required update on our system based upon recent inspections and testing of our facilities. Our Plan is to report and then meet directly with the State to make sure we are not overwhelmed by continuing requirements or debt. We hope to proceed on a steady methodical manner that we can afford and will produce all of the desired results over a reasonable period of time. Here is some background for your information.

• City operates a sewer system containing 27 miles of pipe, more than half of which is substandard, small diameter leaky clay pipe that is over 100 years old.
   
• During wet weather and snowmelt events, excessive groundwater infiltration and storm water inflow into these pipes hydraulically overloads the downstream wastewater treatment plant.
• As is common in old sewer systems, Belfast has two combined sewer overflow (CSO) points that protect the treatment plant from flooding by relieving peak flows above the plant's capacity out into Belfast Harbor.
   
• EPA and DEP regulations require all CSO communities, including Belfast, to conduct a series of phased sewer system improvement projects to remove the excess flows that cause CSO activity.
   
• Belfast was required to submit a Sewer System Master Plan for CSO Abatement in 2000. The plan was subsequently updated in 2005.
   
• The City's wastewater discharge license requires the City to submit a new update to its CSO plan periodically and an update is due on July 31, 2008. It is in the process of being prepared by Olver Associates Inc.
   
• The purpose of the Master Plan Update is to review sewer system improvements that the City has completed to-date, to assess the benefits of these improvements in terms of reduced CSO volume losses, to define areas of the sewer system where excess flows still exist, and to define the remaining sewer system improvement projects and costs.
   
• As part of the current plan update, flow gauging of the Belfast sewer system was conducted under both high spring groundwater conditions and high storm water inflow conditions over the past six months. Measurements were conducted at night when sanitary sewer flows were low and only excess flows were in the system.
   
• The City has conducted several major CSO abatement projects over the last eight years including sewer work on Miller Street, Wight Street, Condon Street, Salmond Avenue, Northport Avenue, Bridge Street, Pierce Street and Fahey Street.
   
• Peak flows in the sewer system have been reduced from 5.22 MGD (million gallons per day) prior to 2000 down to about 3.40 MGD at present, or about a 34 percent reduction.
   
• CSO activity was typically 5 to 7 events per year before 2000. The initial phases of sewer work reduced these events down to 1 CSO per year both in 2001 and 2002 and then 0 CSO events per year both in 2003 and 2004. This was a very promising trend.
   
• In the last three years, increased CSO activity has returned with 5 CSO events in 2005, 3 events in 2006, and 5 events in 2007. However, it is not known if this is an anomaly due to the unusual weather patterns over the past three years. While typical annual rainfall is 43 inches, we received 62 inches in 2005 and 57 inches in 2006. In 2007, we received unusually high intensity rain events that averaged 0.37 inches per hour with some storms as high as 0.89 inches per hour as compared to a norm of 0.20 inches/hour. These events represent 100 to 500 year frequency storms while most sewer systems are designed to convey 25-year storms.
   
• Flow gauging work showed that areas of the sewer system that have been repaired over the last eight years no longer contribute excess flows. Areas of the sewer system that were previously identified as having excess flows in past Master Plan Updates, but which have not yet been repaired, were found to still represent the predominant areas of excess flow origination that lead to CSO activity.
   
• There are seven remaining project areas in the sewer system where old 6" diameter clay pipes leak profusely and where most of the excess water that creates CSO activity originates. These 100-year-old sewers are also maintenance problems for the City and will eventually need to be replaced before they fail. They are located in the following areas 1) The Vine Street sewer between Front Street and Waldo Avenue, 2) Side streets off Miller Street including Court Street, High, Street, Church Street, and Grove Street, 3) Sewers off main Street on High Street, 4) Sewers on Glenview Lane, 5) Sewers in the North Ocean Street area, 6) Sewers on Penobscot Terrace, and 7) Sewers on Washington Street.
   
• The City's wastewater discharge license requires that the CSO abatement projects be completed by 2016. The Master Plan Update process allows the City an opportunity to request a schedule modification to reflect current conditions.
   
• Sewer construction costs have raised significantly over the past year due to rising energy costs, which have increased 200 percent since the CSO program was initiated. In the 2005 CSO Master Plan Update, the estimated cost of complying with the DEP CSO regulations by completing all identified sewer improvement projects was estimated at $ 5.94 million dollars in 2005 dollars. These costs have escalated to $ 7.63 dollars in 2008 dollars.
   

• The City may not need to complete all of the identified sewer projects. It is required to proceed down the list of projects until such time as it can demonstrate compliance with the requirement of zero CSO discharges during a twenty-five year storm event, which DEP defines as 4.70 inches/day of rain. The City used to overflow its CSO at storms as low as 0.41 inches/day. With recent sewer work, the average threshold has now increased to 3.26 inches/day.
   
• DEP does not have a policy that recognizes storm intensity in inches/hour. A twenty-five year storm of 4.70 inches/day would fall at an average of 0.20 inches/jour. In recent years, higher intensity storms have fallen at greater than 0.20 inches/hour, but daily rainfall amounts are less than 4.70 inches/day. (For example, one storm discharged almost one inch of rain in a single hour.) The sewer system responds hydraulically to a short-term storm as if it were going to last all day. Therefore, there should be an intensity criteria in inches/hour to define CSO compliance with regard to a twenty-five year storm.
   

• To prevent the CSO abatement work from creating a financial hardship to the City's sewer users, a meeting is being requested between the City and DEP to request that the schedule be extended to allow a reasonable time for compliance. The City will also be requesting grant assistance because of the impact that the CSO program may have on future sewer rates without such assistance.
   
• The full CSO Master Plan Update report will be presented to the City at a future meeting.

 That’s about it. Have a great weekend.