Okay, we have the new storm water (water quality from storm drainage (run-off))fees, and then we have drainage fees having been collected since 1998. The Storm Water Advisory Committee and the City Council were told we HAD to get this Storm water Board up and running and definitely get those five (5) whomever DRAINAGE employees OUT OF THE SEWER UTILITY FINANCIALS.
So, to the people who went and inquired to the Controller and then to the City Planning Commissioner about where OUR drainage monies are and they said they didn't know, they may be correct.
As I chatted with some of you and realized there was information you couldn't obtain, a light bulb went off and I went and looked at EMC's monthly Wastewater Treatment Report. As you know, we have outsourced that "accounting" portion of the Controller's job to Melhiser Endres Tucker, CPA's, P.C. So, I pulled the December 2006 EMC report and looked for the financial report from Melhiser Endres Tucker, CPA's, P.C. (which, after studying State statute, I still don't understand how you can outsource our financials).
Lo and behold, we have the following information -- DRAINAGE never came out of sewers. It's still lumped in there and you can't really tell what is happening, but the most pertinent information should be somewhere else; it shows the Sewer Board getting Income Statements and Cash Flow Statements, etc. Here goes:
Invoice #: 154233
Date: 11/13/2006
Date Due: 12/13/2006
Client ID: A0191
WASTEWATER UTILITY - CITY OF NEW ALBANY
38 W 10th Street
Attn: Brian
New Albany, IN 47150 and it has a place to pay by Visa or Mastercard
For Professional Services Rendered as Follows:
WASTEWATER UTILITY - CITY OF NEW ALBANY
Progression of Accounting Records from January - September, 2006
posting of receipts and disbursements.
Reconciliation of Cash Balance.
Other Schedules for meeting.
Attendance at City Council Budget meetings.
Income Statements and Cash Flow Statements for the Sewer Sanitation Department, AND DRAINAGE.
Officer 10.7 hours x $155.00 = $1,658.00
Staff Accountant 33.8 hours x $ 65.00 = $2,797.00
Current Charges: $3,855.00
See, it doesn't say amounts...it only says attached schedules. The Sewer Board should have the attachments showing the DRAINAGE monies, or someone...maybe check with the City Clerk for the attachments of the Income Statements and Cash Flow Statements for the Sewers and DRAINAGE, because they sure aren't telling the public.
No problemo looking all of this up...just hope it helps.
Yes, there is a difference between the storm water and drainage. Drainage is going to be the quantity of water and that fee is suppose to be collected by the Planning Commission before the Building Commissioner can issue a Building Permit.
Storm water, well, they're collecting that one on the water bills, though SWAC wanted it on the property tax bills so EVERYONE GETS BILLED. We also wanted to put Storm water under the Planning Commission (rather than reinvent the wheel), but John and Scott didn't want it. Storm water is relevant to the quality of the drainage (run-off), and drainage would be the quantity. I sure hope all of this makes sense. LOL
Peace, NA.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Thanks for the info, though I'm still trying to figure it out.
Good morning, Shirley. Your welcome for the info...I can add more to help you understand, though I will have to take you for a walk down "history's" lane, to explain all.
In 1991, under former Mayor Bob Real, he saw this "stormwater" issue coming at the City. Plans were started in '92 and '93 to get the following studies done, by the following individuals:
Bob Hawkins & Omni Engineering did a study on all "cross-connections" in the City. This study shows where the "Storm Sewers" are tied in with the "Sewer Sewers". This study was probably done by 98.
In 1998, the Stormwater Master Plan was done for our City by GRW Engineers. The Sewer System Evaluation Study (the SSES) was done by Bill Rynearson.
With all of these studies, we feel we can trust the Engineers involved in each one.
In 1998, G-98-280 was passed by the City Council. You will find this under Chapter 54: Drainage of City Codes. It starts out with (A) It is hereby the policy of the city that all new developments constructed within the jurisdiction to the City Plan Commission shall be built consistent with the provisions set forth in the Storm Water Master Plan. New developments shall share in the cost of storm drainage improvements through the City...(and it goes on and on for a few pages).
Under current New Albany Code, 54.03 the Drainage Fees imposed by the Plan Commission were adopted in 1998. (1) Residence or Duplex Resident....$100. PER UNIT. (2) Commercial or Industrial Buildings And Impervious Areas Including Parking Lots....$ .05 PER SQUARE FOOT.
When I came in at the tail end of Council and saw you Thursday night, Mr. Dietrick from the Storm Water Board, was speaking to Council about how the new Storm Water Board really needed the "new Ordinances" passed because it pertained to MS4 Permits and how they need this money. The Stormwater Advisory Committee was brought up, which I happened to sit upon; which in returned caused Council to turn to me; but I had some homework to do to check it all out.
Unfortunately for me, I was very much aware of the Storm Water Master Plan GRW performed; but was not aware of current New Albany City Code Chapter 54.
The Council tabled that ordinance Thursday night, when presented to Council. One number shows it WOULD HAVE BEEN G-06-03; one shows it would have been G07-03, eventually becoming R07-03, presented to Council 2-15-07.
Here is what the Storm Water Attorney drew up, I'm assuming it was Mr. Sommers, and here in lies the kicker (and I am going to print this verbatim - typos and all and show you these in order to show the quality of work being done).
ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CONSTRUCTION RUNOFF QUALITY MANAGEMENT ORDINACE (notice how Ordinance is spelled here) (G-06-03) TO PROVIDE FOR THE COLLECTION OF PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT FEES
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of New Albany, Indiana has adopted Ordinance No. G-06-03, namely the Construction Runoff Quality Management Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, said Ordinance does not address the imposition and collection of fees for plan review and site inspection, and,
WHEREAS, the imposition and collection of feed (notice how fee is feed) for plan review and site inspection is necessary for effective ordinance implementation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDINANCED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY, STATE OF INDIANA THAT:
1. Ordinance No. G-06-03, namely the Construction Runoff Quality Management Management Ordinance, is hereby AMENDED to provide for the imposition Collection of fees for plan review and site inspection.
2. That said fees for plan review and site inspection shall be determined and imposed by the New Albany Storm Water Board in conjunction with the Common Council of the City of New Albany.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS _____ DAY OF ______, 2007 BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY, STATE OF INDIANA.
_______________
LARRY KICHERT (and of course, this how they spelled Kochert's name), PRESIDENT
COMMON COUNCIL, CITY OF NEW ALBANY
ATTEST:____________________
MARCEY WISMAN, CITY CLERK
This is exactly why SWAC didn't want to reinvent the wheel. This is exactly why SWAC felt it was already set up under the Plan Commission, and should simply be part and parcel of their signing off on ANY DEVELOPMENT (it is all relevant). This is also why I, sitting on SWAC, called Denny Stroud, who then worked for the State for years approving our Budgets, and he told me to recommend to the Council to put this new Storm Water Fee onto the Property Tax Rolls. After passing this advice on to Council, the Controller chose to stand up and call me a liar at that particular meeting (like I would have a reason to lie ... I'm not a Developer with hidden agendas to just get it done, whether infrastructure is there or not).
Memebers of the Council and the public could not find the current "Drainage Fees" monies that are to be submitted to either Planning or the Controller before a Building Permit can be issued, under current law Chapter 54.03, and were looking from 1998 on, as they were to have been into a "non-reverting fund".
The SWAC and the City Council were told WE HAD TO GET DRAINAGE OUT OF THE SEWERS ASAP, because of Auditing purposes and it being lumped in with the Sewers' monies.
When Council nor public could retrieve the information about how much monies we have in Drainge (not Storm Water, though Tim was asked about that Thursday and he responded Council would get that info when the Controller printed year-end financials on February 28th), they "all" turned to me for more info. Blah.
I simply found where the Drainage monies are (STILL IN SEWERS), per our outsourced Accounting firm in EMC's monthly Sewer Utility book; and have now found Developers are being double-billed it looks like under the new ordinances they're trying to pass, what with the fees already sitting on them under Drainage for Impervious Areas Including Parking Lots.
Besides being misled about DRAINAGE WAS COMING OUT OF THE SEWER DEPARTMENT, I was also misled into thinking we needed to recalculate all impervious areas and parking lots and recently we just paid someone to redo this task; all because the Storm Water Advisory Committee (SWAC) was not aware of Chapter 54 of New Albany Law. Daggone it. For further discussions on whether I am right or wrong, we can simply turn our attentions to the other members of SWAC and those would be: Kevin Zurschmeide, John Gonder, Melanie Hughes, Dutch Vigar, Tim Dietrick, Maurice King (at one time), and myself alongwith the Consulting firm of FMSM. I am probably leaving someone out and I truly apologize.
That's when I did some digging and finally figured out all of this, which is truly a nightmare; and I just hope the Council and taxpayers can now get a true accounting of the monies from this area (like other areas)...and there are other steps I plan on taking, but I am certainly not going to make it public at this time. I am too upset with all of this mess to even budge another foot. We feel NO MORE RAISES ON ANYTHING UNTIL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ALL MONIES ARE ANSWERED -- WHERE IS IT AND WHAT WAS IT SPENT FOR!
I will not argue the Drainage Fee in place now (the $ .05 PER SQUARE FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL) doesn't need to be raised...it does. But, at the same time, you can not double tax the builder which is what is going down at this time. But, the City will not answer questions about this issue...wonder why?
WHY WERE WE ALL MISLED? WHY THE CONVOLUTED PROCESS? WHY THE MISCONCEPTION WAS PUT OUT THIS CITY HAD TO GET THE DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT OUT OF THE SEWERS UTILITY FINANCES, AND THEN THE CITY DOESN'T?
It's just another can of worms, or whoop a**, whatever you want to call it, that comes when you try to do anything for or with this Administration, and some in the past.
We all served on the SWAC free, with over four hour meetings some nights. Storm Water is not a very interesting issue...but something all of us are paying for...and something that seems to have gotten lost and convoluted in the process...but what ELSE IS NEW?
More coffee is needed by me, and I sure hope I helped make it clearer, but I am not sure I did. Please feel free to call me, or write on here what needs further clarification. After all the time we served to make sure this durn thing went right, it is extremely frustrating to me and I am sure to Council, too, that none of us were able to get the accounting of the monies in order to see if Council should or could pass these new Ordinances presented by SWAC Thursday night.
Thanks for asking, it needed asked.
P.S. When Corey Earle worked for us, he did a study with John Gonder and Dutch Vigar which showed the points of pollution of the storm water run off were due to sewers. They hushed this up; denied the report existed; but I found it and handed it off to Dutch Vigar, because he and John Gonder had worked with Mr. Earle on this and they had never seen the finished product as they were promised. See how it is tied to sewers? Does it never end?
Also, being trained in the legal field also (all matters except criminal law), I would like to advise the Storm Water Board to tell their Attorney that any legal document that has typos in it can, in whole, be thrown out of a Court of Law. You may wish to make sure Ordinances are correct verbatim; this didn't help your case any, trust me.
I remember distinctly the Council meeting when Garner said salaries for Drainage employees had to come out of the sewers IMMEDIATELY. Realizing now that this STILL hasn't occurred is maddening.
I still don't understand why we have a Drainage department and board that is seperate from the Stormwater Drainage and board.
Is the City double-dipping on fees, or are we really supposed to be paying for water runoff twice?
Once the developer pays the fee for drainage to build, then again for the occupants of the building to pay a Stormwater fee every month?
Should these two avenues of paying for 'drainage' be working together so as not to do the same work twice? Such as calculating impervious surfaces?
I think I'm still a bit confused about what each is supposed to be doing, and why.
What needs to happen to get the "Drainage" employees seperated from the sewers money?
Let's use an example. Say, you are a business owner and you built you a nice big building and then you kept the building and had your offices located there.
These particular individuals paid for drainage fees affecting infrastructure when they received approval from the Plan Commission.
Now, these same people are paying again, the new Storm Water fee now monthly; and in one case the Storm Water fee monthly is higher than their Property Taxes -- probably more than one.
Just another mess. Thanks for responding.
I only have a minute to add this:
Stormwater studies by GRW (started under Mayor Real) came back "Stormwater Master Plan" in June 1992 under Mayor England and then approved by Council.
Drainage Fees implemented for new construction approved by Council (haven't had time to check date certain).
EPA required study of stormdrains contamination into creeks about 1997. Presnell Associates (work mainly done by Bob Hawkins who then went to Omni Engineering) came back with report in 1998.
Sewer System Evaluation Study (SSES) was done by Presnell Associates with Bill Rynearson heading the field work (smoking lines). Executive Summary presented to Sewer Board January 2000 under Mayor Overton.
Susan
Thank you, Friend. The info surely helps because it lays it out better the exact timeframes and what and who and, probably the most important, WHY. Gracias.
Post a Comment