Laserfiche WebLink
332 <br /> August 19,1987 <br /> ' .. The Utility Superintendent mill notify by mail all customers that <br /> .418 need PRY installations. These customers will be given the option of <br /> e <br /> the city Installing the PRO and recovering the costs of <br /> Installation, maintenance and replacement through the rate schedule <br /> {F� proposed in the ordinance or installing antlaintainingthe PRY <br /> ' <br /> themselves. IT the customer elects to install the PRV, or she <br /> B<, will be required to sign an agreement with the crty withrn a <br /> specified time of receipt of the letter, probably 30 days and will <br /> not be billed the special PRO charge. If an agreement is not <br /> 1 1,I c <br /> exe uted within the specified time period,the city will install the <br /> PRY and bill per the ordinance. <br /> 1"' <br /> 1 He said the council 111 have to make the decisionwhether the cos <br /> of the PRY installation will be borne by the people h e them,or <br /> 4 spread through the rate base as a whole. <br /> t I f hYp 1 Councilman Nlva asked if the estimated cost turned out to be less <br /> 4i 1 I) than anticipated, would the rates be reduced and Mr. °livers <br /> i�. answered Yes. <br /> { 1ut Councilman Stephanion said the issue dealt with at the first reading <br /> of the ordinance was not whether the charge mss appropriate bdid <br /> aj �$ the process work, In other words did the city provide the people an <br /> '� opportunity to get educated and he said Mr.['livers seemed to have <br /> done a good job doing that at the August 11th meeting. He said the <br /> yy other issue seemed to be whether the citizen would be allowed to <br /> provide the device or would the city just Install it and charge the <br /> tf, customer and again, he Pelt Mr. °livers had been flexible in this <br /> F • approach. H id the issue of cost me something the council would <br /> ,11 have to deal with,although unpleasant,and those residents that are <br /> enjoying this mater are going to have to bear. <br /> �.F I Debra Bickford of 7127 SkipleRoad said these citizens are being <br /> charged and they are the samecitizens that were asked for a <br /> easement to allow the pipeline to cross their property. She said at <br /> thelest meeting theymere complaining of the lack of information <br /> } <br /> and the problee of safety. She had questioned whether a legal <br /> permit had been Issued. The Utility Department had made application <br /> for a SEPA Permit and the Planning Department had issued it but <br /> after reVieving the application she Pelt the permit had been issued <br /> I y with leas than Pull information. <br /> „ <br /> T.1111 <br /> ( Steve Palmer of 12313 60th St.S.E. Snohomish said this ordinance <br /> kfi is in violation f several Washington State Constitution and <br /> appellate court decisions wand should be changed to a more reasonable <br /> II! <br /> tl eqult able proposal. <br /> Z <br /> flay Nisar oP 10002 56th S[.,Snohomish Bald at the AuguItc <br /> meeting <br /> s �i � Mr.Olives we asked whet the Last voultl be to the waterustomers5��` ibau[Sfcaanget^ epxeatl over the whole city and he fxeplletlI a ee> �` Larry Jasper of 8919 5oth St. S.E.,Snehomlsh vas conceed about1� whatwould happenOawnstsean1thepipesprunga leak.r11 n Steghanson acted If there ate other lines thatave thissymachopress ntlNr. Oliversreplietlyes antlthatthisne voultl <br /> not have h pressure as had been planned when the pipe w <br /> ',Nt installed,ea mac es ° <br /> 1111 It <br />