HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2006-10-04COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. October 4, 2006
PRESENT:
Mayor Peterson
Alderpersons (9) Coles, Seger, Berry, Clairborne, Tomlan, Zumoff, Gelinas,
Townsend, Cogan
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk – Conley Holcomb
City Attorney – Hoffman
City Controller – Thayer
Planning and Development Director – Van Cort
Deputy Planning & Development Director – Cornish
Community Development Director – Bohn
Superintendent of Public Works – Gray
Human Resources Director – Michell-Nunn
Fire Chief – Wilbur
Economic Development Director - DeSarno
EXCUSED:
Alderperson Korherr
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag.
ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA:
City Administration Committee:
Alderperson Coles noted that a Substitute Resolution for Item 9.3 Human Resources -
Amendment to Annual Leave Related to Managerial Benefits – Resolution had been
distributed.
Special Presentations before Council:
Mayor Peterson requested the following additions:
Presentation of the Mayor’s 2007 Budget
Presentation by Pamela Mackesey, Tompkins County Legislator for the 1st District
Presentation by the Shade Tree Advisory Committee
No Council member objected
Mayor’s Appointments:
Mayor Peterson stated that she would like to add Item 16.1 – Appointments to the Youth
Bureau Advisory Board.
No Council member objected
Individual Member Filed Resolutions:
Mayor Peterson stated that Item 15.1 - Resolution to Approve A Joint Study Group to
Investigate Possible Shared Services and Possible Consolidation between the City of
Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca had been distributed to Council members.
PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS:
Mayor Peterson proclaimed the week of October 1-7, 2006 as Cornell Cooperative
Extension and National 4-H Week in the City of Ithaca.
Mayor Peterson further proclaimed October 10, 2006 as World Mental Health Day.
October 4, 2006
2
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Mayor Peterson presented the 2007 Mayor’s Recommended Budget to Common
Council with the following Budget Message:
“Like the last several budgets, the 2007 budget has been one that requires difficult
decisions. Again, this year, the Mayor’s budget is one that attempts balance—
acknowledging years of cutbacks, layoffs, attrition, and huge increases in costs for
retirement and insurance, especially health insurance—coupled with the desire to keep
taxes low—and also coupled with requests for improved or increased services. The last
few years have especially shown the evidence of prior decisions that saved money, at
the time, by delaying work, capitalizing operations, and reducing staff. These decisions
now show all too well, appearing as complaints about customer service or quality of life
issues such as road repairs. This budget takes additional incremental, although small,
steps to improve the city’s outlook.
This message will highlight areas of the City budget, review the Mayor’s budget goals
directive to department heads, and explain how this budget meets these goals.
As you know, the earliest step for the budget was to review capital project submissions.
Six and a half million dollars of requests were submitted. These requests reflect the
needs of each department. A small review committee consisting of the Mayor, the
Controller, the Superintendent of Public Works, the Planning Director, and the technical
assistance of a Planner, met several times to categorize the requests as “mission
critical”, “operating budget”, or put on hold. The proposed capital project list is now set
at four and a half million dollars with another half million dollars being moved into the
operating budget. It is important to understand this part of the budget as it reflects on
the tax levy and the tax rate. It has been the goal of my administration, and the goal of
the Controller, to have a sustainable budget that does not rely on placing operational
costs into capital costs, a method that ultimately costs the City and the taxpayers more
money.
The next step was to review departmental budgets in light of the Mayor’s request that
budgets be submitted with a 1% increase scenario and a 3.5% scenario. These
standards provide snapshots of how a department would function at those levels. For
most departments, even the 3.5% goal was a negative budget due to salary increases
alone. Most of the final departmental budgets will be higher than 3.5%. There are a
variety of reasons. One notable one is reflected by moving certain capital expenses
back to operational, where they should be. Examples of this include smaller equipment
purchases such as a decibel meter, police radios or small building repairs. A more
significant piece is moving smaller, regularly replaced vehicles back into the
departmental budgets. Additionally, overtime accounts have been somewhat increased
to reflect the true numbers; fuel for vehicles and utility expenses have been adjusted to
our best guess. This has resulted in a 2.26% tax rate increase and a 6.1% levy
increase.
Highlighted details follow:
Several departments have received small staff hour increases, or in some cases where
customer service complaints are very high, have received a larger increase. The smaller
increases are in the Controller, Clerk, and Chamberlain’s office. Larger programmatic
changes are in the Building Department (restructuring needed for a very high level of
building permits and new, unfunded state mandates for inspection increases
commencing in 2007), the Department of Public Works (creating a new Sidewalk
Department that will result in better service, less expense, and assistance with snow
and ice removal rather than capitalizing the work), and the Fire Department (a Municipal
Training Officer). The Streets and Facilities department has created a 5-year plan that
moves the city forward in street repair. The need is great as the City is recovering from
years of cutbacks. The first year funding is achieved through CHIPS (the State’s
October 4, 2006
3
Consolidated Local Street and Highway Improvement program to assist localities in
financing the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of local highways). By
gradually implementing the additional costs of “catch-up” we hope to get close to a
regular maintenance schedule by 2011. Each year predicts around $300,000 for catch-
up, about 2 points on the tax rate.
A small amount of money is being set aside in restricted contingency for improvement
for public information. Many suggestions have been made about this topic and the City
will continue to improve in this regard. Efforts such as the construction notification
program, Mayor forums and conversations, and the reader friendly budget have been
successful. I look forward to additional ideas and resources such as improved Web
applications, news bulletins, and Web interactivity. Focus groups will be used to select
the best strategies.
This budget assumes no changes in meter or parking garage rates. Trash tags will be
priced the same. Changes to yard waste pickup will be considered this month.
Sustainability initiatives that are expected include results and possible action through
the energy performance contract work being undertaken by the City and Johnson
Controls. Thus, large building improvement items such as those cited in the Thomas
report, are covered under that future program. New vehicle purchase for the Building
Department is likely to include an electric vehicle. This is our second contract year for
wind power purchase. The new sidewalk program will promote safe, walkable areas of
the City and will help reduce car use.
A 92-page budget has been presented to you and will take some time to understand. A
6.1% levy is the lowest in 5 years, yet is 2 points over the CPI. The decision to move
some programs forward, rather than status quo, has been based on community
concerns and infrastructure and building repair necessity.”
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Tompkins County Legislature
Pamela Mackesey, 1st District representative of the Tompkins County Legislature
addressed Council regarding the following items:
Proposed cuts to Human Services agencies have been restored in the County budget.
A Tompkins County Empire Zone Board is being established to assist business owners
in Empire Zones, and the County is looking for members to serve. Legislator Mackesey
asked that if any Council member had names of people to serve on this Board to please
forward them to the County.
Shade Tree Advisory Council
Dr. Nina Bassuk, Chair of the Shade Tree Advisory Council (STAC), addressed Council
to present the STAC’s annual report that included information on current tree
inventories and budgetary issues. A copy of this report is on file in the City Clerk’s
Office.
Chrys Gardener, Coordinator of the Beautification Project for the City of Ithaca,
addressed Council and explained that the group is funded by the hotel room tax and
that their goal is to improve the visual quality of downtown, particularly areas visited by
tourists. She proposed that the City hire a half-time employee in 2008 to oversee City
plantings and volunteers; as well as provide access to City equipment. She further
announced that City Forester, Andy Hillman, has been named President of the Society
of Municipal Arborists, affiliate of the International Society of Arboriculture.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Larry Roberts, Chair of the Disability Advisory Council, submitted a letter to Council in
support of Gadabout’s request for emergency funding.
Robin Palmer, Town of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park.
October 4, 2006
4
Lilian Lightborne, addressed Council regarding the CDL program funded by CDBG
monies. There have been 12 CDL trainees and now there are 12 new CDL permit
holders waiting to take their road test. There are a lot of employers and recruiters
looking for people with Class A licenses in the area. She thanked Council for the
opportunity to offer these classes.
Tom Stern, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding an employment hearing and the
right of City employees to speak out on matters of public policy.
Joel Harlan, Town of Newfield, addressed Council regarding the dog park and
suggested that it be located in the Southwest Park area. He further addressed Council
regarding the Inlet Island development plans.
Steve Flash, Town of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding Inlet Island development and
his proposal for Preferred Developer status.
Mary White, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park.
Melissa Luckow, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding her opposition to the Inlet
Island land swap.
Seth Sicroff, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park.
Mack Travis, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of the Inlet Island Project and
the selection of Steve Flash and Finger Lakes Development, LLC as the Preferred
Developer.
Thomas Hartshorne, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of the hotel project on
Inlet Island and the selection of Finger Lakes Development LLC as the Preferred
Developer.
Brian Zapf, Seneca County, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park.
Guy Gerard, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding the Festival Lands and dog
park issues.
Jonathan Bernstein, Trumansburg, addressed Council regarding Allen H. Treman
Marina and the dog park.
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR:
Alderperson Berry responded to comments made regarding the dog park, and
Washington Park concerns.
Alderperson Tomlan announced information regarding the Pride of Ownership Awards
and nomination period.
Alderperson Clairborne thanked the speakers for their comments and welcomed the
high school students in attendance to the meeting. He further responded to comments
made regarding the CDL program and what a great opportunity it is for people to
develop skills to assist them in finding employment.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
Building Department - Request to Amend 2006 Building Department Authorized
Personnel Roster - Resolution
By Alderperson Berry: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, the position of Senior Code Inspector in the Building Department was
recently vacated due to retirement, and
WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner has reviewed the departmental staffing needs
and has determined that the most effective way to fill this vacancy is with the position of
Housing Inspector; now, therefore be it
October 4, 2006
5
RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Building Department be amended as
follows:
Delete: One (1) Senior Code Inspector (Grade 17)
Add: One (1) Housing Inspector (Grade 15)
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the funding for this roster change shall be derived from within the
existing Building Department budget.
Carried Unanimously
Youth Bureau - Request to Amend 2006 Youth Bureau Budget - Resolution
By Alderperson Berry: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau has been advised by the Tompkins County
Workforce Investment Board that they will be receiving $7,515.00 in additional funding
for the Summer TANF Employment Program (Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families), and
WHEREAS, the goal of this program is to provide short-term subsidized internships for
50 TANF eligible teens needing assistance in securing summer employment; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2006 Youth Bureau Budget to
account for said funding as follows:
Increase revenue account:
A7310-4820-1202 Federal Aid Youth - YES $7,515.00
Increase expense account:
A7310-5120-1202 Part time/Seasonal $6,592.00
A7310-9030 FICA/Medicare $505.00
A7310-9040 Workers’ Comp $418.00
$7,515.00
Carried Unanimously
CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
A Local Law to Repeal Chapter 264 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled:
“Sewer Use” and enacting in its place a new Chapter 264 entitled: “Sewer Use
Requirements”
By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca adopted a series of Intermunicipal Sewer Agreements
between 2003 and 2005 to modify several existing agreements and adopt several new
agreements in order to create a new broader base for intermunicipal cooperation on
existing and future wastewater issues, and
WHEREAS, the changes incorporated in those agreements resulted in the need to
change the City’s current Chapter 264, Sewer Use, to reflect those agreements, as well
as an opportunity to update the sewer use provisions to reflect current practice, and
WHEREAS, staff and the Special Joint Committee’s (SJC) attorney has produced an
updated sewer use law which has been reviewed and approved by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA or EPA) which is currently being or has been
adopted by the Towns of Ithaca and Dryden as the City’s partners in the wastewater
plants operation, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed these agreements, now therefore
October 4, 2006
6
Local Law No. _____ - 2006
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows:
Section 1.
The current Chapter 264 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “Sewer Use”
adopted by Common Council on August 5, 1992 by Local Law No. 4-1992 is hereby
repealed in its entirety, and in its place a new Chapter 264 is hereby enacted as follows:
CHAPTER 264: SEWER USE REQUIREMENTS
A LOCAL LAW ENTITLED "SEWER USE REQUIREMENTS"
ARTICLE I
General Provisions
264-1. Purpose and Applicability
264-2. Administration
264-3. Definitions and Word Usage
ARTICLE II
Regulation of Wastewater Discharges
264-4. General Discharge Prohibitions
264-5. Specific Discharge Prohibitions
264-6. Specific Pollutant Limitations
264-7. Categorical Pretreatment Standards
264-8. Modification of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
264-9. State Requirements
264-10. Right of Revision
264-11. Dilution Prohibited in Absence of Treatment
264-12. Alternative Discharge Limits
264-13. Pretreatment
264-14. Accidental Discharges
ARTICLE III
Wastewater Discharge Permits
264-15. Permit Required
264-16. Permit Application Requirements
264-17. Permit Conditions
264-18. Permit Modifications
264-19. Duration of Permits
264-20. Permit Transfer
264-21. Permit Decisions
ARTICLE IV
Reporting Requirements, Monitoring, and Inspections
264-22. Reporting Requirements
264-23. Signatory Requirements
264-24. Monitoring and Analysis
264-25. Recordkeeping Requirements
264-26. Monitoring Facilities
264-27. Inspection and Sampling
264-28. Slug Control Plans
264-29. Confidential Information
October 4, 2006
7
ARTICLE V
Hauled Wastewater
264-30. Hauler and Generator Requirements
264-31. Hauled Wastewater Discharge Requirements
264-32. Dumping Location and Timing
264-33. Notification of Dumping
264-34. Dumping Fees
ARTICLE VI
Enforcement
264-35. Imminent Endangerment
264-36. Other Harmful Discharges
264-37. Publication of List of Violators
264-38. Compliance Orders
264-39. Suspension and Revocation of Permit
264-40. Notice of Violation
264-41. Show Cause Hearing
264-42. Legal Action
ARTICLE VII
Penalties and Costs
264-43. Civil Penalties
264-44. Criminal Fines and Imprisonment
ARTICLE VIII
Fees
264-45. Charges and Fees
264-46. Assessment of Charges and Fees
264-47. Surcharges for Certain Conventional Pollutants
ARTICLE IX
Local Pollutant Limitations
264-48. Purpose and applicability
264-49. Definitions
264-50. Specific pollutant limitations
264-51. Applicability of other requirements and prohibitions
ARTICLE X
Severability, Repealer, and Effective Date
264-52. Severability
264-53. Repealer
264-54. Effective Date
ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 264-1. Purpose and Applicability
A. The purposes of this chapter are the following:
Deleted: Septage Discharges
Deleted: Septage
Deleted: Septage
October 4, 2006
8
(1) To set forth uniform requirements for contributors into the
wastewater collection and treatment system currently owned jointly by the City of Ithaca,
the Town of Ithaca, and the Town of Dryden (hereinafter collectively referred to as the
"municipalities") and to enable the municipalities to comply with all applicable
requirements under New York and federal law, including, without limitation, the Clean
Water Act of 1977, as amended, and the General Pretreatment Regulations
promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. Part 403. Additional municipalities may in the
future join in the ownership of this wastewater collection and treatment system.
(2) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the municipalities'
publicly owned treatment works ("POTW") which will:
(a) interfere with its operations, including interference with the use or
disposal of municipal sludge;
(b) Pass Through or otherwise be incompatible with the POTW;
(c) limit opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and
industrial wastewater’s and sludge’s; or
(d) endanger the health or safety of sewer workers.
(3) To prevent new sources of infiltration and inflow and, to the extent
possible, eliminate existing sources of infiltration and inflow; and
(4) To provide for equitable distribution and recovery of the cost of the
municipal wastewater system.
B. This chapter shall apply to all Users of the POTW in the municipalities and
to persons who are, by resolution, agreement, contract, or permit with the municipalities,
Special Joint Committee, or POTW, Users of the POTW.
§ 264-2. Administration
Except as otherwise provided herein, the Chief Operator and his or her duly
authorized representatives, acting as the agents and representatives of the Special
Joint Committee and of the municipalities, shall have the authority to administer,
implement, and enforce the provisions of this law chapter. To the extent practicable and
consistent with the requirements of the General Pretreatment Regulations set forth at 40
C.F.R. Part 403, the Special Joint Committee shall keep officials in the City of Ithaca,
Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, and any other municipality which contracts with the
municipalities to discharge wastewater to the POTW, reasonably informed of
implementation and enforcement activities involving Users located in their respective
municipalities, and shall consult with such officials in appropriate implementation and
enforcement activities with respect to Users located in their respective municipalities.
§264-3. Definitions and Word Usage
A. Definitions.
Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the following terms and
phrases, as used in this chapter, shall have the meanings hereinafter designated:
(1) Act. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean
Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., and the regulations promulgated
thereunder, as amended from time to time.
(2) Approval Authority. The Regional Administrator of the EPA, unless and
until New York State receives EPA approval of a state pretreatment program. Once
New York State receives such approval, then the Approval Authority will be the
Commissioner of the DEC.
(3) Authorized Representative. An authorized representative of an Industrial
User shall be: (1) a responsible corporate officer, if the User is a corporation, provided
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: the Special Joint
Subcommittee and its representative,
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: or Special Joint
Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
9
that the responsible corporate officer is: (a) a president, vice-president, secretary, or
treasurer of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, (b) any other
person who performs similar policy- or decision-making functions for the corporation, or
(c) the manager of a facility or facilities employing more than 250 persons or having
gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second-quarter 1980
dollars), provided that the manager has received the authority to sign documents in
accordance with corporate procedures: (2) a general partner or proprietor, if the User is
a partnership or sole proprietorship, respectively; (3) a member of the governing board
or executive office of a governmental entity, if the User is a governmental facility, or (4)
a duly authorized representative of the individual designated above if such
representative is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the
industrial discharge originates, or has overall responsibility for environmental matters for
the company, provided, however, that the authorization is made in writing by the
individual described above, and the written authorization is submitted to the Chief
Operator.
(4) Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand ("BOD5). The quantity of oxygen
utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory
procedure for five (5) days at 20 centigrade, expressed in terms of weight and
concentration (milligrams per liter (mg/l)).
(5) Bypass. The intentional diversion of waste streams from any
portion of an Industrial User's treatment facility.
(6) Categorical Pretreatment Standard. A National Pretreatment
Standard, which applies to a specific industrial subcategory and is published at 40
C.F.R. Chapter I, Subchapter N.
(7) Chief Operator. The person appointed by the City of Ithaca to supervise
the operation of the POTW, or his or her duly authorized representative, including the
Pretreatment Coordinator.
The Chief Operator and his or her representatives shall be the Special Joint
Committee's and municipalities’ authorized agents and representatives in the
administration and enforcement of this law.
(8) Cooling Water. The water discharged from any use, such as air
conditioning, cooling, or refrigeration, to which the only pollutant added is heat.
(9) C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations.
(10) DEC. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
(11) Direct Discharge. The discharge of treated or untreated wastewater
directly into the waters of the State of New York or of the United States.
(12) Discharge. See Indirect Discharge.
(13) Domestic Source. Any residence, building, structure, facility, or installation
from which there is or may be discharged to the POTW only sanitary sewage.
(14) EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(15) Garbage. The solid waste from the preparation, cooking, and dispensing
of food, and from the handling, storage, and sale of produce.
(16) Indirect Discharge. The introduction of pollutants into the POTW from any
source, other than a Domestic Source, regulated under section 307(b), (c), or (d) of the
Act.
(17) Industrial User. A source of Indirect Discharge.
(18) Industrial Waste. Any liquid, gaseous, or solid waste substance, or a
combination thereof, resulting from any process of industry, manufacturing, trade, or
Deleted: and¶
approved by the Special Joint
Subcommittee
Deleted: or
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
10
business, from any process related to services or activities performed by any public or
private institution or facility, or from the development or recovery of any natural
resources.
(19) Interference. A discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge
or discharges from other sources, inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment
processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal and which is a cause
of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's SPDES Permit (including an increase in
the magnitude or duration of a violation), or of the prevention of sewage sludge use or
disposal by the POTW in accordance with applicable federal, state, or local statutes and
regulations or permits issued thereunder, as set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 403.3(i).
(20) Municipalities. The City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, and Town of
Dryden, collectively, as well as any other municipalities which may in the future become
owners of the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility. "Municipality" used in the
singular form shall mean any one of the municipalities.
(21) National Pretreatment Standard. Pretreatment Standard. or
Standard. Any regulation containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA
in accordance with sections 307(b) and (c) of the Act which applies to Industrial Users,
including prohibitive discharge limits established pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.5, and
Categorical Pretreatment Standards.
(22) New Source. Any building, structure, facility, or installation, as described
in 40 C.F.R. § 403.3(k), from which there is or may be a Discharge of pollutants, the
construction of which commenced after the publication of proposed Pretreatment
Standards under section 307(c) of the Act which will be applicable to such source if
such Standards are thereafter promulgated in accordance with that section.
(23) Pass Through. A Discharge which exits the POTW into waters of New
York State or the United States in quantities or concentrations which, alone or in
conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a cause of a violation
of any requirement of the POTW's SPDES Permit (including an increase in the
magnitude or duration of a violation).
(24) Person. Any individual, partnership, firm, company, public or private
corporation or authority, association, joint-stock company, trust, estate, governmental
entity, agency or political subdivision of a municipality, of the State of New York, or of
the United States, or any other legal entity, or their legal representatives, agents, or
assigns. The masculine gender shall include the feminine, and the singular shall include
the plural where indicated by the context.
(25) pH. The logarithm (base 10) of the reciprocal of the concentration of
hydrogen ions expressed in grams per liter of solution.
(26) Pollutant. Any element or property of sewage, agricultural, industrial,
commercial or municipal waste, leachate, heated effluent, dredged spoil, solid waste,
incinerator residue, garbage, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive
materials, rock, sand, and cellar dirt, which is discharged into the POTW.
(27) Pretreatment. The reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of
pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater to a less
harmful state prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants
into the POTW. The reduction or alteration can be obtained by physical, chemical or
biological processes, process changes, or other means, except as prohibited by 40
C.F.R. § 403.6(d).
(28) Pretreatment Requirement. Any substantive or procedural requirement
related to Pretreatment, other than a National Pretreatment Standard, imposed on an
Industrial User.
(29) Publicly Owned Treatment Works or POTW. The treatment works, as
defined by Section 212 of the Act, owned by the municipalities and known as the Ithaca
Area Wastewater Treatment Facility. This definition includes any devices and systems
October 4, 2006
11
used in the storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal sewage or
industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It also includes those sewers, pipes, and other
conveyances, which convey wastewater to the POTW's Treatment Plant. For the
purposes of this chapter, POTW shall also include any sewers and other facilities that
convey wastewater to the POTW Treatment Plant from persons who are, by permit,
resolution, contract, or agreement with the municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or
POTW, Users of the POTW.
(30) POTW Treatment Plant. That portion of the POTW designed to provide
treatment (including recycling and reclamation) of municipal sewage and industrial
waste.
(31) Sanitary Sewage. Liquid and water-carried human and domestic wastes
from residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants and institutions, exclusive of
ground, storm and surface water and exclusive of industrial wastes.
(32) Sanitary Sewer. A sewer that carries liquid and water-carried wastes from
residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants and institutions together with minor
quantities of ground, storm, and surface waters that are not admitted intentionally.
(33) Septage. Human and domestic wastes, including both liquids and solids,
in and removed from septic tanks, holding tanks, cesspools, or chemical toilets,
including but not limited to those serving private residences, commercial
establishments, industries, and institutions. Septage shall contain only sanitary sewage.
(34) Sewer. A pipe or conduit that carries wastewater.
(35) Sewerage System. Any device, equipment, or works used in the
transportation, pumping, storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of wastewater.
(36) Significant Industrial User. All Industrial Users subject to Categorical
Pretreatment Standards, and any other Industrial User that discharges an average of
25,000 gallons per day or more of processed wastewater to the POTW (excluding
sanitary, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); contributes a processed
waste stream which makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic
or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant; or is designated as such by the Chief
Operator on the basis that the Industrial User has a reasonable potential for adversely
affecting the POTW's operation or for violating any Pretreatment Standard or
Requirement. Upon a finding that an Industrial User meeting the foregoing criteria has
no reasonable potential for violating any Pretreatment Standard or Requirement or for
adversely affecting the POTW's operation, the Chief Operator may at any time, upon his
or her own initiative or in response to a petition received from an Industrial User, and in
accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(6), determine that such Industrial User is not a
Significant Industrial User. Such a determination may not be made, however, if the
Industrial User is subject to a Categorical Pretreatment Standard.
(37) Sludge. Waste containing varying amounts of solid contaminants removed
from water, sanitary sewage, wastewater or industrial wastes by physical, chemical, or
biological treatment.
(38) Slug. Any discharge of a non-routine, episodic nature, including, but not
limited to, an accidental spill or non-customary batch discharge.
(39) SPDES Permit. A State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
issued pursuant to Section 402 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1342, and Article 17 of the
New York Environmental Conservation Law.
(40) Special Joint Committee. A committee established by the municipalities
and charged with oversight of the POTW, as provided for by agreement among the City
of Ithaca and Towns of Ithaca and Dryden. This committee currently consists of
representatives from the City of Ithaca and Towns of Ithaca and Dryden, and may in the
future include representatives from other municipalities which become joint owners of
the POTW.
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: All
Deleted: not contain pollutants which
the Chief Operator determines may
cause problems at the POTW.
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: subcommittee
Deleted: of the City of Ithaca's Board
of Public Works which is
Deleted: subcommittee
October 4, 2006
12
(41) Suspended Solids. The total suspended matter that floats on the surface
of, or is suspended in, water, wastewater or other liquids, and which is removable by
laboratory filtering in accordance with the current Standard Methods.
(42) Toxic Pollutant. Any pollutant or combination of pollutants listed as toxic in
regulations promulgated by EPA under section 307(a) of the Act, or other Acts, or in
regulations promulgated under New York State law.
(43) User. Any Domestic Source or Industrial User which discharges
wastewater to the POTW.
(44) Wastewater. The liquid and water-carried industrial, non-domestic or
domestic wastes, including sewage, industrial waste, other wastes, or any combination
thereof, from dwellings, commercial buildings, industrial facilities, and institutions,
together with any groundwater, surface water, and storm water that may be present,
whether treated or untreated, which is discharged into the POTW.
(45) Wastewater Discharge Permit or Permit. The document issued to
Industrial Users by the Chief Operator for the discharge of wastewater, as set forth in
Section 264-15 of this chapter.
(46) Waters of the State. All streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, watercourses,
waterways, wells, springs, reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems, drainage systems,
and all other bodies or accumulations of water, surface or underground, natural or
artificial, public or private, which are contained within, flow through, border upon, or are
within the jurisdiction of the State.
B. Word Usage.
"Shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
ARTICLE II, Regulation of Wastewater Discharges
§264-4. General Discharge Prohibitions
A. No User may introduce into the POTW any pollutant(s) which cause Pass
Through or Interference. These general prohibitions and the specific prohibitions in
Section 264-5 of this chapter apply to each User introducing pollutants into the POTW
whether or not the User is subject to National Pretreatment Standards or any other
national, state, or local Pretreatment Requirements.
B. An Industrial User shall have an affirmative defense in any action brought
against it alleging Pass Through or Interference where the Industrial User can
demonstrate that it did not know or have reason to know that its discharge, alone or in
conjunction with discharges from other sources, would cause Pass Through or
Interference, and either (1) the Industrial User was in compliance with the local limits for
each pollutant that caused Pass Through or Interference directly prior to and during the
Pass Through or Interference, or (2) if no local limits for the pollutant(s) which caused
Pass Through or Interference have been developed, the Industrial User's discharge
directly prior to and during the Pass Through or Interference did not change
substantially in nature or constituents from the User's prior discharge activity when the
POTW was regularly in compliance with its SPDES permit requirements and applicable
requirements for sewage sludge use or disposal.
§264-5. Specific Discharge Prohibitions
In addition to the provisions of Section 264-4 above, the following discharges to
the POTW by any User are specifically prohibited:
(A) Storm and surface waters, roof runoff, and subsurface drainage. These
discharges shall be made only to such sewers as are specifically designated by the
Chief Operator as storm sewers, or directly to waters of the State, as may be permitted
under an applicable SPDES permit. All existing discharges to the POTW of such waters
October 4, 2006
13
shall be disconnected within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the effective date of
this law. Groundwater and noncontact cooling water may be discharged to the POTW
only if so authorized by a Wastewater Discharge Permit, and only if the Chief Operator
determines that sufficient hydraulic reserve capacity exists at the POTW to
accommodate such discharges. Authorization for such discharges may be revoked by
the Chief Operator in his discretion at any time if he or she determines that the POTW's
reserve capacity is no longer sufficient or is needed for other potential discharges, or
that such discharge is detrimental in any way to the POTW. Existing unpermitted
discharges of groundwater and noncontact cooling water shall be disconnected within
one hundred and twenty (120) days of the effective date of this law.
(B) Any liquids, solids, or gases which by reason of their nature or quantity
are, or may be, sufficient either alone or by interaction with other substances to cause a
fire or explosion hazard in the POTW or be injurious in any other way to the POTW, its
operation, or the health or safety of the POTW's workers. At no time shall a user
discharge a waste stream with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 degrees
Fahrenheit or 60 degrees Centigrade using the test methods specified in 40 C.F.R.
§261.21. Unless specifically authorized to do so by permit, no User shall discharge any
quantity of the following materials: gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene,
xylene, fuel oil, ethers, ketones, aldehydes, chlorates, perchlorates, bromates, carbides,
hydrides and sulfides, dry cleaning fluids, and any other substance which the Chief
Operator, DEC, or the EPA has notified the User is a fire hazard or explosive hazard to
the system. The preceding list of substances is not a comprehensive list of prohibited
substances. If a substance meets the general criteria set out in the first two sentences
of this subparagraph, it is prohibited.
(C) Solid or viscous substances in quantities or of such size capable of
causing obstruction to the flow in sewers or other interference with the proper operation
of the POTW including, but not limited to: grease, garbage with particles greater than
one-half inch (1/2") in any dimension, animal guts or tissues, paunch manure, bones,
hair, hides or fleshings, entrails, whole blood, feathers, ashes, cinders, sand, spent lime,
stone or marble dust, metal, glass, straw, shavings, grass clippings, rags, spent grains,
spent hops, waste paper, wood, plastics, rubber, tar, asphalt residues, residues from
refining or processing of fuel or lubricating oil, mud, or glass grinding or polishing
wastes.
(D) Wastewater having a pH less than 5.5 standard units, or greater than 11.0
standard units, or wastewater having any other corrosive or caustic property capable of
causing damage or hazard to structures, equipment, and/or personnel at the POTW.
Wastewater having a pH greater than 9.5 standard units, but in no case greater than
11.0 standard units, may be discharged to the POTW only if so authorized by a
Wastewater Discharge Permit, and only if the Chief Operator determines that the
wastewater will not pose a hazard to or harm the POTW or treatment plant workers, will
not cause Pass Through or Interference, and will not raise the costs of operating the
POTW.
(E) Wastewater containing pollutants in sufficient quantity or concentration to
cause the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts from the POTW into its
receiving waters, or to exceed the limitations set forth in a National Pretreatment
Standard, in a Pretreatment Requirement, including the pollutant limitations referenced
herein at Section 264-6, or in a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued pursuant to this
law.
(F) Any pollutants which, either singly or by interaction with other wastes,
result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors, or fumes within the POTW in a quantity
that may cause POTW worker health and safety problems, or which create a public
nuisance, or which create conditions sufficient to prevent entry into the sewers or other
portions of the POTW for maintenance and repair.
(G) Any substance which may cause the POTW's effluent or other product of
the POTW such as residues, sludges, or scums, to be unsuitable for disposal in any
manner permitted by law or for reclamation and reuse, or to interfere with the
reclamation process. In no case shall a substance discharged to the POTW cause the
POTW to be in noncompliance with sludge use or disposal criteria, guidelines, or
October 4, 2006
14
regulations developed under Section 405 of the Act; or with any criteria, guidelines, or
regulations affecting sludge use or disposal developed pursuant to the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, the Clean Air Act, or state criteria applicable to the sludge management
method being used.
(H) Any pollutants, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.)
released in a Discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which will cause
Interference with the POTW.
(I) Any wastewater with objectionable color not removed in the treatment
process1 such as, but not limited to, dye wastes and vegetable tanning solutions.
(J) Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW
resulting in Interference, but in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at
the POTW Treatment Plant exceeds 40C (104F).
(K) Any wastewater containing any radioactive wastes or isotopes of such
half-life or concentration as may exceed limits necessary to comply with applicable state
or federal regulations.
(L) Any sludges or deposited solids resulting from an industrial pretreatment
process. Sludges from food processing pretreatment processes may be discharged only
if specifically allowed by permit.
(M) Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil
origin in amounts that will cause Interference or Pass Through.
(N) Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by
the POTW.
§ 264-6. Specific Pollutant Limitations
In addition to the discharge prohibitions set forth in sections 264-4 and 264-5
above, the POTW has developed specific discharge limitations, hereafter referred to as
local limits, to prevent Pass Through and Interference and to protect the safety and
health of POTW workers. In no case shall a User's discharge to the POTW violate the
local limits, as they may be amended from time to time, and which are set forth in
separate laws adopted by the municipalities.
§264-7. Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Categorical Pretreatment Standards which EPA has promulgated for specific
industrial subcategories are hereby incorporated by reference. Where Categorical
Pretreatment Standards are more stringent than the local limits, Industrial Users in
those subcategories shall comply with the more stringent Categorical Pretreatment
Standards in accordance with the compliance timetables for each Categorical
Pretreatment Standard mandated by EPA. If EPA modifies an existing Categorical
Pretreatment Standard or promulgates a new Categorical Pretreatment Standard for a
particular industrial subcategory, and that modified or new Categorical Pretreatment
Standard contains limitations more stringent than the local limits then upon its effective
date the modified or new Categorical Pretreatment Standard shall immediately
supersede, for Industrial Users in that subcategory, the local limits. The Chief Operator
shall notify all affected Industrial Users of the applicable requirements under the Act, as
well as of all requirements imposed by subtitles C and D of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act.
§264-8. Modification of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
A. Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.7, where the POTW achieves consistent
removal of pollutants limited by a Categorical Pretreatment Standard, the Special Joint
Committee may apply to the Approval Authority for modification of the discharge limits
for a specific pollutant covered in the relevant Categorical Pretreatment Standard in
order to reflect the POTW's ability to remove said pollutant. The Special Joint
Committee may modify pollutant discharge limits contained in a Categorical
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
15
Pretreatment Standard only if the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 403.7 are fulfilled and
prior approval from the Approval Authority is obtained.
B. Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.13, an Industrial User may apply to the
Approval Authority for a fundamentally different factors variance from an applicable
Categorical Pretreatment Standard if the factors relating to its discharge are
fundamentally different from the factors considered by EPA in establishing the
Standard. Such a variance can not be granted without the approval of the Approval
Authority.
§264-9. State Requirements
Requirements and limitations on discharges set by the DEC shall apply in any
case where they are more stringent than federal requirements and limitations or local
limits.
§264-10. Right of Revision
The municipalities reserve the right to establish by amendment to this or other
local laws more stringent limitations or requirements on discharges to the POTW if
deemed necessary to comply with the objectives presented in Section 264-1(A) of this
chapter. The Chief Operator also has the right to require a specific Industrial User to
comply with more stringent limitations or requirements than appear in this or other laws
if deemed necessary to comply with the objectives presented in Section 264-1(A) of this
chapter. No variances from the limitations or requirements in this or other local laws will
be allowed without approval of both the Chief Operator and the Approval Authority.
§264-11. Dilution Prohibited in Absence of Treatment
Except where expressly authorized to do so by an applicable Pretreatment
Standard or Pretreatment Requirement, no Industrial User shall ever increase the use of
process water or in any other way attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with either a Pretreatment
Standard or Pretreatment Requirement.
§264-12. Alternative Discharge Limits
A. Where appropriate, the Chief Operator may impose mass limitations,
concentration limitations, or both types of limitations on an Industrial User's discharge.
Mass limitations shall not be less stringent than the equivalent concentration-based
limitations set forth in any applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment
Requirement.
B. Where wastewater from a process regulated by a Categorical
Pretreatment Standard is mixed prior to treatment with wastewaters other than those
generated by the regulated process, the Chief Operator may fix alternative discharge
limits applicable to the mixed effluent. Such alternative discharge limits shall be derived
by using the combined waste stream formula as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 403.6(e).
§264-13. Pretreatment
Each Industrial User shall provide necessary wastewater treatment as required to
comply with the requirements of this law, including all National Pretreatment Standards
and Pretreatment Requirements. Any facilities required to pretreat wastewater to a level
which will achieve compliance with this law shall be provided, operated, and maintained
at the User's expense. Detailed plans showing the pretreatment facilities and operating
procedures shall be submitted to the Chief Operator for review, and shall be acceptable
to the Chief Operator before construction of the facility. The review of such plans and
operating procedures will in no way relieve the User from the responsibility of modifying
the facility as necessary to produce an effluent which complies with the provisions of
this chapter, including compliance with Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment
Requirements. Any subsequent changes in the pretreatment facilities or method of
operation shall be reported to and be acceptable to the Chief Operator prior to the
October 4, 2006
16
User's initiation of such changes. Bypasses are prohibited, except as allowed by 40
C.F.R. § 403.17.
§264-14. Accidental Discharges
A. Plans and Procedures. All permitted Industrial Users, and all other
Industrial Users which store or use on-site any substance which, if discarded, would be
considered hazardous waste, as that term is defined by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act and its regulations, shall undertake measures to prevent the accidental
discharge to the POTW of prohibited materials or other substances regulated by this
law. Facilities to prevent the accidental discharge of prohibited materials and other
substances shall be provided and maintained at the Industrial User's own expense.
Detailed plans showing facilities and operating procedures to provide this protection
shall be submitted to the Chief Operator for review, and shall be approved by the Chief
Operator before construction of the facility. All existing Industrial Users required to
undertake accidental discharge prevention measures shall submit such a plan within
sixty (60) days of the effective date of this chapter. No Industrial User which
commences discharging into the POTW after the effective date of this law and required
to submit such a plan shall be permitted to introduce pollutants into the system until
accidental discharge procedures have been approved by the Chief Operator. Review
and approval of such plans and operating procedures shall not relieve the Industrial
User of the responsibility to modify the User's facility as necessary to meet the
requirements of this chapter.
B. Telephone Notice. In the case of an accidental discharge by any
Industrial User, it is the responsibility of the Industrial User to telephone immediately
and notify the Chief Operator of the incident. The notification shall include location of
discharge, type of waste, concentration and volume of pollutants and wastewater, and
any and all corrective actions taken by the User.
C. Written Notice. Within five (5) days following an accidental discharge, the
Industrial User shall submit to the Chief Operator a detailed written report describing the
cause of the discharge and the measures which have been and shall be taken by the
User to prevent similar future occurrences. Such notification shall not relieve the
Industrial User of any expense, loss, damage, or other liability which may be incurred as
a result of damage to the POTW, fish kills, or any other damage to persons, animals,
aquatic life, property, or natural resources; nor shall such notification relieve the
Industrial User of any fines, civil penalties, or other liability which may be imposed by
this chapter or other applicable law.
D. Notice to Employees. A notice shall be permanently posted on the
Industrial User's bulletin board or other prominent place advising employees whom to
call in the event of an accidental discharge. Employers shall ensure that all employees
who may cause or allow such a discharge to occur, or who may know or have reason to
know thereof, are advised of the emergency notification procedures.
ARTICLE III, Wastewater Discharge Permits
§264-15. Permit Required
All significant Industrial Users, and all other Industrial Users which discharge any
conventional pollutants in excess of the surcharge threshold levels described in Section
264-47 below, shall obtain and maintain current Wastewater Discharge Permits. All
Industrial Users whose discharges are of a type specifically identified in this law as
requiring a Wastewater Discharge Permit (such as, for example, a discharge with a pH
greater than 9.0 standard units, or a discharge of noncontact cooling water) shall also
obtain and maintain current Permits. Existing Industrial Users which are required to but
do not have a current Wastewater Discharge Permit as of the effective date of this
chapter shall apply to the Chief Operator for such a Permit within thirty (30) days after
the effective date of this law. Existing Industrial Users which are not required as of the
effective date of this law to obtain such a Permit, but which thereafter become required
to obtain such a Permit, shall file an application for said Wastewater Discharge Permit
with the Chief Operator within thirty (30) days of notification by the Chief Operator that
the User must obtain a Permit. All Industrial Users which are required to have such a
October 4, 2006
17
Permit and which propose to begin discharging wastewater to the POTW after the
effective date of this law shall obtain a Wastewater Discharge Permit before
commencing such a discharge. An application for said Wastewater Discharge Permit
shall be filed with the Chief Operator at least sixty (60) days prior to the proposed
connection or discharge to the Facility. The requirement to obtain said Industrial
Wastewater Permits shall be in addition to the requirements to obtain sewer connection
or other permits which may be set forth in other laws.
§264-16. Permit Application Requirements
A. To obtain a new Wastewater Discharge Permit, or to renew an expiring Permit, the
Industrial User shall complete and file with the Chief Operator an application in the form
prescribed by the Chief Operator, and accompanied by the appropriate fee as indicated
on the application. In support of the application for a Wastewater Discharge Permit, the
Chief Operator may require the Industrial User to submit, in units and terms appropriate
for evaluation, the following information:
(1) Name, address, and location of the User (if different from the address);
(2) SIC number with at least three (3) digits according to the Standard
Industrial Classification Manual, Bureau of the Budget, 1972, as amended;
(3) Wastewater constituents and characteristics, including, but not limited to,
the concentrations of pollutants referenced in Sections 264-6 and 264-47 of this
chapter, as determined by a New York Department of Health-certified analytical
laboratory; sampling and analysis shall be performed in accordance with procedures
established by the EPA pursuant to Section 304(h) of the Act and contained in 40
C.F.R. Part 136, as amended, and results of said sampling and analysis, identifying the
nature and concentration of regulated pollutants contained in each regulated discharge
stream, shall be attached as Exhibits to the application;
(4) Time and duration of discharges;
(5) Average daily and maximum daily wastewater flow rates, identified
separately by regulated discharge streams, and including daily, monthly, and seasonal
variations, if any;
(6) Site plans, floor plans, mechanical and plumbing plans, and details to
show all sewers, sewer connections, and appurtenances by size, location, and
elevation;
(7) Description of activities, facilities, and plant processes on the premises,
including all materials which are or could be discharged;
(8) Where known, the nature and both daily maximum and average
concentrations of any pollutants in the discharge which are limited by any applicable
National Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, and a statement
regarding whether or not any applicable Pretreatment Requirement or Pretreatment
Standard is being met on a consistent basis and, if not, whether additional Operation
and Maintenance (O&M) and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial
User to meet the applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement;
(9) If additional pretreatment and/or O&M will be required to meet the above-
described Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, the shortest
schedule by which the Industrial User will provide such additional pretreatment or O&M,
which shall not be later than the compliance date established for the applicable
Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement;
The following conditions shall apply to this schedule:
(a) The schedule shall contain increments of progress in the form of
dates for the commencement and completion of major events leading to the
construction and operation of additional pretreatment required for the Industrial User to
October 4, 2006
18
meet the applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement (e.g., hiring an
engineer, completing
preliminary plans, completing final plans, executing contract for major components,
commencing construction, completing construction, attaining and maintaining
compliance, etc.).
(b) No increment referred to in Paragraph 1 shall exceed nine (9)
months.
(c) Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the
schedule and the final date for compliance, the Industrial User shall submit a
progress report to the Chief Operator including, at a minimum, whether or not it
complied with the increment of progress to be met on such date and, if not, the date on
which it expects to comply with this increment of progress, the reason for delay, and the
steps being taken by the Industrial User to return the construction to the schedule
established. In no event shall more than nine (9) months elapse between such progress
reports to the Chief Operator.
(10) Each product produced by the User, if any, by type, amount, process or
processes and rate of production;
(11) Type and amount of raw materials processed by the User (average and
maximum per day);
(12) Number and type of User's employees, User's hours of operation and
proposed or actual hours of operation of pretreatment system;
(13) Completed New York State Industrial Chemical Survey;
(14) Name, title, and telephone number of the Authorized Representative of the
Industrial User;
(15) A list of any environmental control permits held by or for the User;
(16) Any other information as may be deemed by the Chief Operator to be
necessary to evaluate the permit application.
B. The Chief Operator shall evaluate the data furnished by the Industrial User and may
require additional information. After evaluation and acceptance of the data furnished,
the Chief Operator may issue a Wastewater Discharge Permit subject to terms and
conditions provided herein.
§264-17. Permit Conditions
A. Wastewater Discharge Permits shall be expressly subject to all provisions of this
chapter and all other applicable laws and regulations established by the municipalities or
Special Joint Committee.
B. In addition, Wastewater Discharge Permits may contain the following:
(1) The unit charge or schedule of User charges and fees for the wastewater
to be discharged to the POTW;
(2) Limits on average and maximum wastewater constituents and
characteristics, based on applicable National Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment
Requirements.
(3) Limits on average and maximum rate and time of discharge, and
requirements for flow measurement, regulation, and equalization;
(4) Requirements for installation and maintenance of pretreatment facilities
and of inspection and sampling facilities;
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
19
(5) Specifications for monitoring programs which may include specification of
pollutants to be monitored, sampling locations, frequency of sampling, number, types
and standards for tests and reporting schedules;
(6) Compliance schedules for the installation of pretreatment equipment and
performance of O&M (but in no event may a compliance deadline in a Permit be later
than a National Pretreatment Standard compliance deadline);
(7) Requirements for submission of reports, including technical reports and
discharge reports;
(8) Requirements for maintenance and retention of records relating to
wastewater discharges and pretreatment equipment operation and maintenance records
for a minimum of three (3) years, and affording the Chief Operator access thereto for
inspection and copying;
(9) Requirements for advance notification to the Chief Operator of any change
in operations, and for advance approval by the Chief Operator of any new introduction of
wastewater constituents or any substantial change in the volume or character of the
wastewater constituents being introduced into the wastewater disposal system;
(10) Requirements for immediate notification to the Chief Operator of all
discharges that could cause problems to the POTW, including any slug discharges and
any other accidental discharges;
(11) A statement of the Chief Operator's right to enter Industrial Users'
premises and inspect their facilities and operations;
(12) A statement of Permit duration in accordance with §264-19 hereof, and in
no case more than five (5) years;
(13) A statement of Permit transferability in accordance with§264-20 hereof;
(14) A statement of applicable civil and criminal penalties for violation of
Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements, and of any applicable
compliance schedule;
(15) Other conditions as deemed appropriate by the Chief Operator to ensure
compliance with this law and the Act.
§264-18. Permit Modifications
A. Wastewater Discharge Permits may be modified by the Chief Operator upon thirty
(30) days notice to the permittee. Modifications may be made for the following, or other
similar, reasons:
(1) Promulgation of or changes to a Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment
Requirement;
(2) Changes in processes used by the permittee, or changes in discharge
volume or character;
(3) Changes in design or capability of any part of the POTW;
(4) Changes to the POTW's SPDES permit; and
(5) Discovery that the permitted discharge causes or contributes to Pass
Through or Interference at the POTW or poses a risk to POTW worker health or safety.
B. Any modifications or amendments to the Wastewater Discharge Permit which
include more stringent limitations than those contained in the prior Permit may include a
reasonable time schedule for compliance therewith, but no compliance deadline therein
October 4, 2006
20
shall be later than the deadline for compliance with an applicable Categorical
Pretreatment Standard.
§264-19. Duration of Permits
Wastewater Discharge Permits shall be issued for a specified time period not to exceed
five (5) years. A Wastewater Discharge Permit may be issued for a period less than a
year or may be stated to expire on a specific date. An Industrial User shall apply for
Wastewater Discharge Permit reissuance, on a form prescribed by the Chief Operator, at
least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the User's existing Permit. If a timely and
complete application is made for Permit reissuance, and the Permit is not reissued
before the existing Permit expires, then the terms of the User's existing Permit shall
remain in effect after its expiration date until the Permit is reissued.
§264-20. Permit Transfer
Wastewater Discharge Permits are issued to a specific Industrial User for a
specific operation. A Wastewater Discharge Permit shall not be reassigned, transferred,
or sold to a new owner, new User, or be applicable to different premises or to a new or
changed operation without the approval of the Chief Operator, which must be obtained in
writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date. No such
approval shall be granted absent submission to the Chief Operator of a written
agreement between the existing and proposed new permittee which sets forth the date
for and terms of the transfer of the Wastewater Discharge Permit and all responsibilities,
obligations, and liabilities thereunder. Any succeeding owner or User shall comply with
the terms and conditions of the existing Wastewater Discharge Permit and all of the
terms and requirements of this law.
§264-21. Permit Decisions
A. The Chief Operator shall provide all interested persons with notice of decisions
concerning the issuance, modification, or transfer of Wastewater Discharge Permits. Any
person, including the Industrial User to whom the Wastewater Discharge Permit was
issued, may petition the Special Joint Committee for review of the Wastewater Discharge
Permit issuance, modification, or transfer decision within twenty (20) days of the date on
which the decision was issued. Failure to submit a timely petition for review shall be
deemed to be a waiver of Wastewater Discharge Permit review, and the Chief Operator's
decision shall become final.
B. A petition for review must set forth the Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions or
decision objected to, the reasons for the objection, and the alternative provisions, if any,
which the petitioner seeks to have included in the Wastewater Discharge Permit.
C. The effectiveness of a Wastewater Discharge Permit shall not be stayed
pending the Special Joint Committee's review of the petition. The Special Joint
Committee's decision concerning the petition for review shall constitute a decision of the
municipalities and shall be a final administrative action.
ARTICLE IV, Reporting Requirements, Monitoring and Inspections
§264-22. Reporting Requirements
All Industrial Users must submit the reports required by 40 C.F.R. Part 403 or the
Chief Operator. The Chief Operator shall specify the content of such reports to the
Industrial Users. These reports include the following:
A. Baseline monitoring reports, to be submitted by existing Industrial Users subject to
Categorical Pretreatment Standards within one hundred eighty (180) days after the
effective date of the Categorical Pretreatment Standard. These reports are to be
submitted by New Sources and sources that become Industrial Users after the
promulgation of an applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard, at least ninety (90)
days prior to commencement of discharge. These reports shall contain the information
required in 40 C.F.R. § 403.12(b), including a statement whether Pretreatment
Standards are being met on a consistent basis, and, if not, whether additional O&M
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
21
and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial User to meet the
Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. This statement shall be reviewed by an
Authorized Representative of the Industrial User and certified to by a qualified
professional.
B. Report on compliance with Categorical Pretreatment Standards, to be submitted by
existing sources within ninety (90) days following the date for final compliance with an
applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard, or in the case of a New Source, following
commencement of the introduction of wastewater into the POTW. This report shall
contain the information required in 40 C.F.R. § 403.12(d), including the nature and
concentration of all pollutants in the discharge from each regulated process, and the
average and maximum daily flow for these process streams. This report further shall
state whether Pretreatment Standards are being met on a consistent basis, and, if not,
whether additional O&M and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial User
to meet the Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. This statement shall be
reviewed by an Authorized Representative of the Industrial User and certified to by a
qualified professional.
C. Periodic reports on continued compliance, to be submitted by all permitted Industrial
Users subject to Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements after the
compliance date of such Standard or Pretreatment Requirement, or, in the case of a
New Source, after commencement of the discharge into the POTW. All such Industrial
Users shall submit such reports to the Chief Operator during the months of June and
December, unless required more frequently or at different times in the Pretreatment
Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or by the Wastewater Discharge Permit. All
Industrial Users must include in such reports all sampling results for pollutants limited by
a Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or Wastewater Discharge Permit, if
the sampling and analyses were performed in accordance with § 264-24 of this law, even
if the sampling was performed more frequently than required by the Pretreatment
Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or Wastewater Discharge Permit. In addition,
such reports shall include a record of measured or estimated average and maximum
daily flows for the reporting period.
D. Compliance Schedule Reports, to be submitted by all Industrial Users
required to submit compliance schedules or who have compliance schedules imposed
on them by the Chief Operator.
E. Notification in advance of any substantial change in the volume or character of
pollutants in an Industrial User's discharge, including the listed or characteristic
hazardous wastes for which the Industrial User has submitted initial notification pursuant
to §264-22(K) of this chapter, to be submitted by all Industrial Users. No Industrial User
shall introduce new wastewater constituents or substantially change the volume or
character of its wastewater constituents without such advance notification and advance
written approval of the Chief Operator.
F. Notification of change in production level, to be submitted by Industrial users
operating under a permit incorporating equivalent mass or concentration limits calculated
from a production based standard. These notifications shall be submitted to the Chief
Operator within two (2) business days after the Industrial User has a reasonable basis to
know that the production level will significantly change within the next calendar month.
G. Notification of discharges that could cause potential problems to the POTW,
including slug loadings and accidental discharges, to be submitted by all Industrial Users
to the POTW immediately when the slug loading or discharge containing the potential
problem occurs. If the immediate notification is oral, a written notice specifying the nature
and cause of the discharge, and steps taken to eliminate the cause, must be submitted
to the POTW within five (5) days.
H. Notification of violation, as described in §264-24 below.
I. Upset notifications, to be submitted by Industrial Users subject to Categorical
Pretreatment Standards. Such an Industrial User may avail itself of the upset provisions
of 40 C.F.R. § 403.16 only where there is an exceptional incident in which there is
October 4, 2006
22
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with the Categorical Pretreatment Standard
because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the Industrial User. The upset
notification must be submitted to the Chief Operator within twenty-four (24) hours of the
Industrial User's becoming aware of the upset (if this information is provided orally, a
written submission must be provided within five (5) days), and the Industrial User must
comply with all requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 403.16.
J. Bypass notification, to be provided by all Industrial Users in advance of the
bypass, if possible, or within twenty-four (24) hours from the time the Industrial User
becomes aware of the bypass, if the bypass is unanticipated. The Industrial User must
further comply with all of the requirements regarding bypass set forth in 40 C.F.R. §
403.17.
K. Notification of hazardous waste discharge:
(i) (a) All Industrial Users shall notify the Chief Operator, the EPA
Regional Waste Management Division Director, and the Director of DEC's Division of
Hazardous Substance Regulation in writing of any discharge into the POTW of a
substance which, if otherwise disposed of, would be a hazardous waste under 40 C.F.R.
Part 261. Such notification shall include the name of the hazardous waste as set forth in
40 C.F.R. Part 261, the EPA hazardous waste number, and the type of discharge
(continuous, batch, or other). If the Industrial User discharges more than 100 kilograms
of such waste per calendar month to the POTW, the notification shall also contain the
following information to the extent such information is known and readily available to the
Industrial User: an identification of the hazardous constituents contained in the wastes,
an estimation of the mass and concentration of such constituents in the wastestream
discharged during that calendar month, and an estimation of the mass of constituents in
the wastestream expected to be discharged during the following twelve months.
(b) All existing Industrial Users shall have filed such notifications by February
19, 1991. All Industrial Users who commence discharging after August 23, 1990, shall
file the notification no later than one hundred eighty (180) days after the discharge of the
listed or characteristic hazardous waste. Any notification under this section need be
submitted only once for each hazardous waste discharged. However, all Industrial Users
must notify the Chief Operator in advance, in accordance with §264-22(E) of this
chapter, of any change in their wastewater discharges. The notification requirement set
forth herein does not apply to any pollutants already reported under the self-monitoring
requirements set forth in Sections 264-22(A), (B), and (C) above.
(ii) Industrial Users are exempt from the requirements of Section 264-22(K)(i)
during a calendar month in which they discharge no more than fifteen (15) kilograms of
hazardous wastes, unless the wastes are acute hazardous wastes as specified in 40
C.F.R. § 261.30(d) and 261.33(e). Discharge of more than fifteen (15) kilograms of non-
acute hazardous wastes in a calendar month, or of any quantity of acute hazardous
wastes as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 261.30(d) and 261.33(e), requires a one time
notification. Subsequent months during which the Industrial User discharges more than
such quantities of any hazardous waste do not require additional notification.
(iii) In the case of any new regulations under Section 3001 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act identifying additional characteristics of hazardous waste
or listing any additional substance as a hazardous waste, the Industrial User must notify
the Chief Operator, the EPA Regional Waste Management Waste Division Director, and
the Director of DEC's Division of Hazardous Substance Regulation of the Discharge of
such substance within ninety (90) days of the effective date of such regulations.
(iv) In the case of any notification made under this Section, the Industrial User
shall certify that it has a program in place to reduce the volume and toxicity of hazardous
wastes generated to the degree it has determined to be economically practical.
264-23. Signatory Requirements
All reports required to be submitted to the Chief Operator shall include the
following certification statement:
October 4, 2006
23
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were
prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted.
Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons
directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best
of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment for knowing violations."
This certification statement shall be signed by an Authorized Representative of
the Industrial User.
264-24. Monitoring and Analysis
A. If the Industrial User's sampling indicates a violation, the User shall notify
the Chief Operator within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of such violation.
The User shall also repeat the sampling and analysis and submit the results of the
repeat analysis to the Chief Operator within thirty (30) days after becoming aware of the
violation. The Industrial User is not required to resample, however, if the Chief Operator
performs sampling at the Industrial User's facility at a frequency of at least once per
month, or if the Chief Operator performs sampling at the Industrial User's facility between
the time when the Industrial User performs its initial sampling and the time when said
User receives the results of the sampling.
B. The frequency and location of monitoring shall be prescribed in the
Wastewater Discharge Permit and shall not be less frequent than prescribed in Section
264-22(C). At the discretion of the Chief Operator, the required monitoring and analysis
may be performed by the POTW, in lieu of the Industrial User, in which event the
Industrial User is not required to submit the report or compliance certification required
therein.
C. All analyses shall be performed in accordance with procedures
established by the EPA pursuant to section 304(h) of the Act and contained in 40 C.F.R.
Part 136 and amendments thereto, or with any other test procedures approved by the
EPA. Sampling shall be performed in accordance with the techniques approved by the
EPA and shall be performed in such a manner and at such a time that the resulting
analytical data is representative of conditions occurring during the reporting period.
Samples of the Industrial User's wastewater discharges shall be collected at each point
of discharge to the POTW sewerage system. Where 40 C.F.R. Part 136 does not include
sampling or analytical techniques for the pollutants in question, or where the EPA
determines that the Part 136 sampling and analytical techniques are inappropriate for the
pollutant in question, sampling and analyses shall be performed using validated
analytical methods or any other sampling and analytical procedures, including
procedures suggested by the Chief Operator or other parties, approved by the EPA.
264-25. Recordkeeping Requirements
A. All Industrial Users shall maintain records of all information resulting from
any monitoring activities of wastewater discharges. Such records shall include for all
samples:
(i) The date, exact place, method, and time of sampling and the names of
the person or persons taking the samples;
(ii) The dates analyses were performed;
(iii) Who performed the analyses;
(iv) The analytical techniques/methods used; and
(v) The results of such analyses.
All Industrial Users shall also maintain records regarding pretreatment
equipment operation and maintenance.
October 4, 2006
24
B. All Industrial Users shall keep copies of all such records and reports of
operation and maintenance, and monitoring activities and results, for a minimum of three
(3) years. The records and reports of monitoring activities and results shall be
maintained regardless of whether such monitoring activities are required by this law or
the Act. Each Industrial User shall make all records required to be maintained available
for inspection and copying by EPA, DEC, and the Chief Operator. This period of
retention shall be extended during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the
discharge of pollutants by the Industrial User or the POTW or when requested by EPA,
DEC, or the Chief Operator.
264-26. Monitoring Facilities
The Chief Operator may require any Industrial User to provide, operate and
maintain, at the Industrial User's own expense, sampling, monitoring and/or metering
facilities at the point or points in the facility selected by the Chief Operator to allow
inspection, sampling, and flow measurement of discharges to the sewerage system
and/or internal piping systems. Sampling and monitoring facilities may be located as
approved by the Chief Operator to allow direct access by POTW personnel without the
necessity of notice to the Industrial User. There shall be ample room in or near such
sampling manhole or facility to allow accurate sampling and preparation of samples for
analysis. The sampling and monitoring facilities shall be provided in accordance with the
Chief Operator's requirements and all applicable local construction standards and
specifications. Construction shall be completed within ninety (90) days following written
notification to the Industrial User by the Chief Operator that such facilities must be built.
264-27. Inspection and Sampling
A. The Chief Operator may inspect the facilities of any Industrial User to
ascertain whether the purposes and requirements of this law and the Act are being met.
Persons or occupants of premises where wastewater is created or discharged, or where
records pertaining to such discharges are kept, shall allow POTW representatives ready
access at all times to all parts of the premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling,
records examination and copying, or the performance of any of their other duties. The
Chief Operator, EPA, and DEC shall have the right to set up without notice on the User's
property such devices as are necessary to conduct sampling, inspection, compliance
monitoring, metering operations, and records copying. Where a User has security
measures in force which would require proper identification and clearance before entry
into its premises, the User shall make necessary arrangements with its security guards
so that upon presentation of suitable identification, personnel from the POTW, EPA, and
DEC, or their designated agents, will be permitted to enter, without delay, for the
purposes of performing their specific responsibilities.
B. Where so requested in advance by an Industrial User, and when taking a
sample of industrial wastewater, the POTW representative shall gather sufficient volume
of sample when practicable so that the sample can be split into two equal volumes.
One of the volumes shall be given to the Industrial User, and the other shall be retained
by the POTW representative for analysis.
264-28. Slug Control Plans
At least once every two years, the Chief Operator shall evaluate whether each
Significant Industrial User needs a plan to control slug discharges. The Significant
Industrial User shall comply with the provisions of any such slug control plan which the
Chief Operator determines to be necessary, including, but not limited to:
(A) A description of discharge practices, including non-routine batch
discharges;
(B) A description of stored chemicals;
(C) Procedures for immediately notifying the POTW of slug discharges,
including any discharge that would violate a prohibition under 40 C.F.R. § 403.5(b), with
procedures for follow-up written notification within five (5) days; and
October 4, 2006
25
(D) If necessary, procedures to prevent adverse impact from accidental spills,
including those procedures set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(2)(v)(D).
264-29. Confidential Information
A. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 403.14, any information and data
concerning a User which is contained in or obtained from reports, questionnaires,
Permit applications, Permits, monitoring programs, and inspections shall be
available to the public and governmental agencies without restriction, unless the
User specifically claims, and is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
public official with custody of the records, that the release of such information
would divulge information, processes or methods of production entitled to
protection as trade secrets of the User. Any such claim of confidentiality must be
asserted at the time of submission in the manner prescribed on the application
form or instructions or by stamping or writing the words "CONFIDENTIAL
BUSINESS INFORMATION" on each page containing such information. If no claim is
made, such public official may make the information available
to the public without further notice.
B. Notwithstanding any claim of confidentiality, any information and data
provided to the Chief Operator which is effluent data, as defined at 40 C.F.R. § 2.302
(including, but not limited to, wastewater constituents and characteristics), shall be
available to the public without restriction. All other information and data shall be
available to the public at least to the extent provided by 40 C.F.R. § 2.302.
C. Information determined by the public official with custody of the records to
be confidential shall not be made available for inspection by the public, except as
provided by 40 C.F.R. § 2.302, but shall be made available upon written request to
governmental agencies for uses related to this law and the POTW's SPDES Permit.
Information determined to be confidential shall be available for use by the State or any
state agency, the municipalities, the Special Joint Committee, the POTW, or by the
United States or EPA in criminal or civil judicial or administrative enforcement
proceedings involving the User.
ARTICLE V – HAULED WASTEWATER
264-30. Hauler and Generator Requirements
A. No person shall discharge hauled wastewater (septage or industrial
waste) into the POTW's Treatment Plant without a valid DEC permit issued under 6
N.Y.C.R.R. Part 364 and a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued by the POTW. Before
discharging a load of hauled wastewater into the Treatment Plant, the hauler shall
provide the POTW with a list of persons and facilities from which the hauler picked up
wastewater for that load, a statement of the volume and nature of the wastewater, and
any other information requested by the Chief Operator.
B. The Chief Operator may require generators of hauled industrial waste
located within or outside the municipalities to obtain a Wastewater Discharge Permit
issued by the POTW and/or to enter into a contract with the POTW or its owners for
the acceptance of the hauled industrial waste. Generators of hauled industrial waste
must comply with all other requirements of this law.
264-31. Hauled Wastewater Discharge Requirements
No person shall discharge into the POTW's Treatment Plant any hauled
wastewater containing hazardous wastes. The Chief Operator has the discretion to
refuse to accept any hauled wastewater load based on the type, concentration, or
quantity of pollutants, or on the capability or capacity of the POTW to treat the
wastewater. All hauled wastewater discharges must comply with all Pretreatment
Standards and Pretreatment Requirements.
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: -
Deleted: SEPTAGE DISCHARGES
Deleted: Septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage,
Deleted: Septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage.
Deleted: septage
October 4, 2006
26
264-32. Dumping Location and Timing
No person may discharge hauled wastewater to any locations except those on
the POTW treatment plant site designated by the POTW as Hauled Wastewater
Receiving Stations, or those locations off the treatment plant site at which the POTW has
given the hauler specific permission to discharge. The Chief Operator also may restrict
hauled wastewater discharges to certain times, to certain days of the week, or to certain
seasons of the year.
264-33. Notification of Dumping
Each discharge of hauled wastewater shall be made only with the approval of the
Chief Operator. The wastewater hauler shall contact the POTW to obtain permission to
discharge hauled wastewater containing materials other than sanitary sewage prior to
delivering the wastewater load to the POTW. The Chief Operator may require inspection,
sampling, and analysis of each load of hauled wastewater prior to the discharge of the
load. Any costs associated with such inspection, sampling, and analysis shall be paid by
the wastewater hauler.
264-34. Dumping Fees
The POTW shall bill wastewater haulers and/or wastewater generators for dumping fees
associated with the discharge of hauled wastewater, pursuant to a schedule of rates as set by the
Special Joint Committee or municipalities. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless and until Tompkins
County conveys ownership of its Hauled Wastewater Receiving Station to the municipalities, the
POTW shall bill Tompkins County for all discharges of septage and grease. All dumping fees shall
include a fee for the cost of solids disposal.
ARTICLE VI- ENFORCEMENT
264-35. Imminent Endangerment
The Chief Operator may immediately halt or prevent any discharge of pollutants
which reasonably appears to present an imminent endangerment to the health or welfare
of persons. In the event that the Chief Operator determines that a discharge of pollutants
reasonably appears to present an imminent endangerment to the health or welfare of
persons, the Chief Operator shall provide informal (oral or written) notice of said
determination to the User. Said User shall immediately stop or eliminate such discharge
and shall submit written proof of the elimination of the discharge to the Chief Operator
within forty-eight (48) hours of receipt of notice of the Chief Operator's determination. If
said User fails voluntarily and immediately to halt such a discharge, the Chief Operator
shall take such actions as he or she deems necessary to prevent or minimize
endangerment to the health or welfare of persons. Such actions include, but are not
limited to, seeking ex parte temporary injunctive relief, entry on private property to halt
such discharge, blockage of a public sewer to halt such discharge, severance of the
sewer connection, suspension of wastewater disposal service, suspension or revocation
of a Wastewater Discharge Permit, and institution of a legal or special proceeding. After
such discharge has been halted, the Chief Operator may take such
other and further actions provided under this Section as may be necessary to ensure
elimination of said discharge and compliance with the terms of this law and Wastewater
Discharge Permits issued hereunder. If the User provides satisfactory written proof that
it has eliminated the cause of the conditions creating the imminent endangerment, the
Chief Operator may reinstate the Permit, restore the sewer connection and wastewater
disposal service, and perform other activities to allow the User to commence discharging
again.
264-36. Other Harmful Discharges
The Chief Operator may also halt or prevent any discharge of pollutants which:
(A) Presents or may present an endangerment to the environment;
(B) Threatens to interfere with the operation of the POTW; or
Deleted: septage
Deleted: Septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: septage
Deleted: The Special Joint
Subcommittee shall bill Tompkins
County for dumping fees associated
with the discharge of septage from
private sources, pursuant to a
schedule¶
of rates as set by the Special Joint
Subcommittee. The Chief Operator
shall directly bill the relevant
governmental entity for dumping fees
associated with the discharge of
septage from public entities. All
dumping fees shall include a fee for
the cost of solids¶
disposal.
October 4, 2006
27
(C) Threatens to Pass Through the POTW.
In the event of such a discharge, the Chief Operator must deliver a written notice
to the User describing the problems posed by the discharge and offering the User an
opportunity to respond. If the User does not respond in writing to the Chief Operator
within twenty-four (24) hours after delivery of such written notice, then the Chief Operator
may undertake such actions, including those described in Section 264-35, as he or she
deems necessary to prevent or minimize the effects of such a discharge. If the Industrial
User does respond in writing within twenty-four (24) hours, then no immediate
suspension of service or of a Wastewater Discharge Permit shall occur, unless the Chief
Operator reasonably believes that the User's discharge continues to present or may
present an endangerment to the environment or threatens to cause Interference or Pass
Through at the POTW. If the User thereafter provides satisfactory written proof that it has
eliminated the cause of the conditions creating the harmful discharge, then the Chief
Operator may perform activities to allow the User to commence discharging again.
264-37. Publication of List of Violators
The Special Joint Committee shall annually publish in the largest local daily
newspaper a list of the Industrial Users which, at any time during the previous twelve
(12) months, were in significant noncompliance with applicable Pretreatment Standards
or Pretreatment Requirements. For purposes of this provision, an Industrial User is in
significant noncompliance if its violation meets one or more of the criteria set forth at 40
C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(2)(vii).
264-38. Compliance Orders
The Chief Operator may issue compliance orders to Industrial Users not
complying with any Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment Requirements, Wastewater
Discharge Permits, or any other provisions of this law or the Act. Such orders may,
among other things, direct said Industrial User to:
(A) Comply immediately with Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment
Requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions, this chapter, or the Act;
(B) Comply with Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment Requirements,
Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions, this law, or the Act in accordance with a time
schedule set forth by the Chief Operator;
(C) Increase the frequency of sampling and analysis of the Industrial
User's wastewater; and/or
(D) Undertake appropriate remedial or preventive action to prevent the
possibility of violations in the future.
The issuance of or compliance with an order under this section shall not relieve
the Industrial User of liability for violations which occur before the order is issued or
while the order is effective.
264-39. Suspension and Revocation of Permit
A. This section shall govern the ability of the municipalities to suspend or revoke
any Wastewater Discharge Permit to any Industrial User in all situations except those
described in Sections 264-35 and 264-36 of this chapter regarding discharges which
present imminent endangerment or which constitute harmful discharges. In all other
situations, the municipality in which the Industrial User is located (or any of the
municipalities, if the Industrial User is located outside the municipalities) may suspend or
revoke a Wastewater Discharge Permit if it determines that a violation of any provision of
the Permit, the Act, or this chapter exists. of the municipalities are named also have the
power to suspend Users located outside the City Violations which may lead to such
suspension or revocation include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) Failure of an Industrial User to accurately or timely submit the
information required in any report;
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: Unless and until all
Deleted: on the POTW's SPDES
permit, the City of Ithaca shall
Deleted: or revoke Wastewater
Discharge Permits for all Industrial
Deleted: of Ithaca.
October 4, 2006
28
(ii) Failure of an Industrial User to allow access to its premises for the
purposes of inspection, monitoring, sampling, or records examination or copying by the
POTW, EPA, DEC, the United States, or the State;
(iii) Failure of an Industrial User to report significant changes in its
operations or the constituents, characteristics, or volume of its wastewater; or
(iv) Violation of conditions of the Industrial User's permit.
B. Before the relevant municipality may suspend or revoke an Industrial
Wastewater Permit, it must give the Industrial User a hearing in accordance with the
procedures set forth at Section 264-41 below. The final decision as to whether to
suspend or revoke a Permit shall then be made by the municipality and shall be a final
administrative action.
264-40. Notice of Violation
A. Whenever the Chief Operator determines that any Industrial User has
violated or is violating any Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, its
Wastewater Discharge Permit, or any other provision of the Act or this chapter, he or she
may serve upon such User, either personally or by certified mail, return receipt
requested, a written Notice of Violation stating the nature of the violation. The Chief
Operator may include with the Notice of Violation a Compliance Order directing the User
to take specified actions to correct the violations. The Chief Operator or relevant
municipality, as described in Section 264-39 above, may also include with the Notice of
Violation an Order to Show Cause before the municipality as to why the User's
Wastewater Discharge Permit should not be suspended or revoked, or why civil
administrative penalties should not be assessed by the municipality against the Industrial
User for said violations. Any such Show Cause hearing shall be conducted in
accordance with the provisions of §264- 41 of this chapter.
B. Within thirty (30) days of the date of the Notice, the User shall submit to
the Chief Operator a written explanation of the reasons for the violations and a plan for
the satisfactory correction thereof consistent with any Compliance Order which the Chief
Operator may issue.
C. Neither the issuance of a Notice of Violation, nor the submittal of or
compliance with a plan of correction or Compliance Order, shall relieve the Industrial
User of any liability for violations of any Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment
requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permit, the Act, or this chapter, nor is the issuance
of such a written notice required before the municipalities may take any other type of
enforcement action against the Industrial User.
264-41. Show Cause Hearing
A. Notice Requirements. A notice from the Chief Operator or relevant
municipality shall be served on the User specifying the time and place of a hearing to be
held by the municipality regarding the violation, the proposed action to be taken, the
reasons why the action is proposed, and directing the person to show cause before the
municipality why the proposed action should not be taken. The notice of the hearing shall
be served personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, at least ten (10) days
before the hearing. Service must be made on an Authorized Representative of the
Industrial User.
B. Conduct of the Hearing. The municipality shall conduct the hearing and
take the evidence, or may designate any of its members, the Special Joint Committee, or
the Chief Operator to:
(i) Issue in the name of the municipality notices of hearings requesting the
attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of evidence relevant to any
matter involved in such hearings;
(ii) Take evidence;
Deleted: Special Joint
Subcommittee or
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
29
(iii) Transmit a report of the evidence and hearing, including transcripts
and other evidence, together with recommendations to the municipality for action
thereon; and
(iv) Take any further necessary action as permitted by this chapter or
applicable contracts or agreements.
C. Testimony Recorded Under Oath. At any hearing held pursuant to this
law, testimony taken must be under oath and recorded, either stenographically or by
voice recording. The transcript, so recorded, will be made available to any member of
the public or any party to the hearing upon payment of the usual charges therefor.
D. Orders. After the municipality has reviewed the evidence, it may issue an
order suspending or revoking an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit, or assessing
civil administrative penalties, and the timing for their payment to the municipality,
against the Industrial User. The issuance of such an Order shall be a final
administrative action.
E. Settlement. At any time after notice of the Show Cause hearing has been
served and before the municipality has issued its order regarding permit suspension or
revocation or penalty assessment, the municipality may enter into a Settlement
Agreement with the Industrial User to resolve the issues raised by the Order to Show
Cause.
§264-42. Legal Action
If any person violates the provisions of this law, the Act, any applicable
Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, the conditions and requirements
of any Wastewater Discharge Permit issued hereunder, or any order of the Chief
Operator or municipality, counsel for the municipality where such person is located (or
counsel for any of the municipalities, if such person is not located in any of the
municipalities) may commence an action for appropriate legal and/or equitable relief,
including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, penalties, and fines, in either state or federal
court. The municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW may also ask appropriate
officials at the local, state, or federal levels to investigate and bring a criminal action
against any Industrial User or person associated with an Industrial User believed to have
violated the criminal provisions of this law, the Act, or any other law.
ARTICLE VII- PENALTIES AND COSTS
§264-43. Civil Penalties
A. Any person who violates an Order of the Chief Operator or municipality, or
fails to comply with any provisions of this law chapter, the Act, Pretreatment Standards
or Pretreatment Requirements, or Wastewater Discharge Permits issued hereunder, may
be assessed by the relevant municipality, as described in Section 264-39 above, a civil
administrative penalty not to exceed Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00)
per day for each violation. Each day on which a violation shall occur or continue shall be
deemed a separate and distinct offense.
B. Any person who violates an Order of the Chief Operator or municipality, or
fails to comply with any provisions of this law chapter, the Act, Pretreatment Standards
or Pretreatment Requirements, or Wastewater Discharge Permits issued hereunder, may
be assessed a civil judicial penalty not to exceed Five thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) per
day for each violation. Each day on which a violation shall occur or continue shall be
deemed a separate and distinct offense.
C. All civil administrative or civil judicial penalties recovered hereunder shall
be paid to the municipality which prosecuted the enforcement action. After reimbursing
itself for the expenses of prosecution, the municipality shall pay the balance to the City of
Ithaca Joint Activity Fund for POTW expenditures. In addition to the penalties provided
herein, the municipalities may recover court costs, court reporters' fees, and other
expenses of litigation, as well as recoverable attorneys' fees, in an appropriate legal
Deleted: , Special Joint
Subcommittee,
Deleted: In addition, until and unless
all of¶
the municipalities are named on the
POTW's SPDES permit, the City
Attorney for the¶
City of Ithaca shall have the authority
to initiate such court proceedings
against violators¶
located outside the City of Ithaca.
Deleted: Subcommittee
Deleted: , Special Joint¶
Subcommittee,
Deleted: , Special Joint¶
Subcommittee,
October 4, 2006
30
action against the person found to have violated this law or limitations or conditions of a
Wastewater Discharge Permit issued thereunder.
D. Nothing in this section shall preclude the municipalities from bringing an
action against a User for liability incurred as a result of damage to the POTW, fish kills,
or any other damage to persons, animals, aquatic life, property, or natural resources.
§264-44. Criminal Fines and Imprisonment
A. Any person who knowingly violates any requirement of this law or of any
Wastewater Discharge Permit condition or limitation implementing the requirements of
this chapter, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall, if the
person is not a corporation, be punished by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Dollars
($10,000.00) per day of violation, or by imprisonment for a term of not more than one
year, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and if the person is a corporation shall,
upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding Twenty Thousand Dollars
($20,000.00) per day of violation.
B. Any person who knowingly makes any false material statement,
representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document
filed or required to be maintained under this chapter or who knowingly falsifies, tampers
with, or renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained
under this chapter, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall, if
the person is not a corporation, be punished by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand
Dollars ($10,000.00) per day of violation, or by imprisonment for a term of not more than
one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and if the person is a corporation shall,
upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding Twenty Thousand Dollars
($20,000.00) per day of violation.
ARTICLE VIII- FEES
§264-45. Charges and Fees authorized
It is one of the purposes of this chapter to provide for the recovery of costs from
persons who use the POTW, in order to implement the programs established herein.
Charges and fees may include:
(A) fees for reimbursement of the costs of setting up and operating the
POTW's pretreatment program;
(B) fees for monitoring, sampling, inspections, and surveillance procedures;
(C) fees for reviewing accidental discharge procedures and
construction;
(D) fees for Permit applications and modifications;
(E) fees for consistent removal (by the POTW) of pollutants otherwise
subject to National Categorical Pretreatment Standards;
(F) fees for sludge disposal;
(G) other fees as the Special Joint Committee may deem necessary to carry
out the requirements contained herein.
§264-46. Assessment of Charges and Fees
The charges or fees for the items enumerated in Section 264-45 above shall be
set
from time to time in accordance with procedures permitted by applicable laws.
Deleted: Subcommittee
October 4, 2006
31
§264-47. Surcharges for Certain Conventional Pollutants
A. Industrial Users discharging wastewater which exceeds the following
concentrations for any of the conventional pollutants listed below shall pay a surcharge
for use of the POTW:
Level Above Which
Surcharge Applies
Pollutant (24 Hour Composite, in ppm)
_______ ________________________
Chemical Oxygen Demand 350
Suspended Solids 250
BOD5 250
Phosphorus 6
Nitrogen, Total 25
The surcharge shall be calculated to recover the POTW's costs to treat these
conventional pollutants to the extent that the concentrations of these conventional
pollutants exceed the levels stated above. The surcharge shall be set from time to time
in accordance with procedures permitted by applicable laws. The Chief Operator may
grant a surcharge waiver to any Industrial User which demonstrates that its exceedances
of the surcharge threshold levels are due to innovative water conservation practices.
B. The surcharge threshold levels set forth above are not local limits. All
Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements, including the prohibition
against Pass Through and Interference, do apply to discharges of the conventional
pollutants listed above. In addition, nothing in this section shall prevent the Chief
Operator from exercising his or her right, as described in Section 264-10 of this chapter,
to require an Industrial User to comply with specific discharge limits on these pollutants if
deemed necessary to meet the objectives of Section 264-1(A) of this chapter. In the
event that an Industrial User receives specific discharge limits for any of these pollutants,
no surcharge shall apply and violations of the discharge limit by the Industrial User shall
instead subject the Industrial User to the enforcement provisions of this chapter.
ARTICLE IX, Local Pollutant Limitations
§264-48. Purpose and Applicability
A. The purposes of this law are to set forth specific discharge limitations
(hereinafter referred to as local limits) to prevent Pass Through and Interference, to
protect the safety and health of workers at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment
Facility (POTW), and to improve opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and
industrial wastewaters and sludges.
B. This law shall apply to all Users of the POTW in the Towns of Ithaca and
Dryden and City of Ithaca and to persons who are, by resolution, agreement, contract,
or permit with the municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW, Users of the
POTW.
§264-49. Definitions
The definitions set forth in Section 264-3 of this Chapter as they may be revised
from time to time, shall apply to the words in this chapter.
§264-50. Specific Pollutant Limitations
These local limits shall apply at each point of discharge to the sewerage system.
In no case shall a User’s discharge to the POTW violate the following specific
limitations:
October 4, 2006
32
POLLUTANT
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
30-DAY AVERAGE
(mg/l)
MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION
24-HOUR AVERAGE
(mg/l)
Arsenic 0.6
Barium 80 240
Cadmium 2.5 7.5
Chromium, total 8 24
Chromium, hexavalent 1 3
Copper 2 6
Cyanide 0.2 0.6
Iron 180 540
Lead 20
Manganese 8 24
Mercury 1.5 4.5
Nickel 10
Silver 6 18
Zinc 20 35
POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE LIMIT
INSTANTANEOUS
(ppm)
Oil & Grease
(petroleum based)
50
264-51. Compliance with Applicability of Other Requirements and
Prohibitions
All Users further shall comply with all other requirements and prohibitions
regarding discharges to the POTW set forth in the other local laws, including those
specified in each municipality’s Sewer Use Requirements Law as it may be revised from
time to time.
ARTICLE X
Severability, Repealer and Effective Date
264-52. Severability
If any provision, paragraph, word, section, or Article of this chapter is invalidated
by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions, paragraphs, words,
sections, and Articles shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and effect.
§264-53. Repealer
All regulations, ordinances or local laws, and any parts thereof, which are
inconsistent or conflict with any part of this chapter are hereby repealed to the extent of
such inconsistency or conflict.
§264-54. Effective Date
This chapter shall be in full force and effect after its publication, posting, and filing
with the New York Secretary of State and upon approval by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
Carried Unanimously
City Chamberlain – Approval of Adjustment of Tax Payment Schedule –
Resolution
By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, the property located at 45.-1-1 was sold in April of 2003, and
October 4, 2006
33
WHEREAS, an error occurred on the deed that caused only a part of the parcel to be
considered part of the sale, and
WHEREAS, Tompkins County Assessment Department was unsuccessful in contacting
the parties involved to correct the error, and
WHEREAS, in April of 2005, Tompkins County split the parcel into two, to reflect the
filed deed, and
WHEREAS, no Certificate of Apportionment was done to notify the tax collectors of the
split, and
WHEREAS, there were and continue to be delinquent taxes on both the original parcel
and on the split parcels, and
WHEREAS, inconsistent information about the nature of the delinquent taxes has been
provided to the owner of the property and their agents, based on the tax map numbers
used when requesting the information, and
WHEREAS, the owner has only recently been given a full accounting of all of the taxes
due on the property as a whole and as a split parcel and
WHEREAS, the owner is requesting an extension of time in which to pay 2004 and
2005 taxes until December 31, 2006, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council grants this request, and be it further
RESOLVED, That tax delinquent penalty shall not accrue on the current year taxes until
December 31, 2006, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain is authorized to accept the payment of the
2004 and 2005 taxes prior to the payment of the current year taxes provided payment is
made by December 31, 2006.
Carried Unanimously
Human Resources - Amendment to Annual Leave Related to Managerial Benefits -
Resolution
By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Seger
WHEREAS, over the last eight years Common Councils have approved enhanced leave
time benefits for some new hires for various reasons, and
WHEREAS, Common Council desires to eliminate the inequities that result for longer
term managerial staff while at the same time offer benefits that will enable the City of
Ithaca to attract and retain candidates of interest, and
WHEREAS, upon a recent request to provide enhanced benefits Common Council has
requested that the Human Resources Director provide an equitable proposal for
improving leave time benefits for all managerial positions; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That managerial annual leave time be enhanced as follows:
Proposed Current
Length of
Service
40 hrs/wk
35 hrs/wk
Length of
Service
40 hrs/wk
35 hrs/wk
1st Year 10 hrs/mos
(3 wks)
9 hrs/mos (3
wks)
up to 2
years
10 hrs/mos
(3 wks)
9 hrs/mos (3
wks)
2nd – 5th
Year
14 hrs/mos
(4 wks)
12 hrs/mos
(4 wks)
2-7 years 13.5
hrs/mos (4
wks)
12 hrs/mos
(4 wks)
5th- 10th
Year
17 hrs/mos
(5 wks)
15 hrs/mos
(5 wks)
7-20 years 17 hrs/mos
(5 wks)
15 hrs/mos
(5 wks)
10+ Years 20 hrs/mos
(6 wks)
18 hrs/mos
(6 wks)
20 or more
years
20 hrs/mos
(6 wks)
18 hrs/mos
(6 wks)
October 4, 2006
34
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Day After Thanksgiving be deemed a holiday for managerial
staff, and be it further
RESOLVED, That these changes will go into effect on November 1, 2006.
Alderperson Clairborne disclosed that his wife is a managerial employee for the City of
Ithaca and would be impacted by this resolution.
Alderperson Coles explained that this Resolution was discussed at length at the City
Administration Committee meeting.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the proposed Resolution and the impacts that
it would have on current staff. Alderperson Zumoff stated that he supported most of the
Resolution, but he felt that the 20 hours of leave time per month should only be
awarded to employees with over 15 years with the City.
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Zumoff: Seconded by Alderperson Townsend
RESOLVED, That the proposed leave time for employees with more than 15 years of
service be 20 hrs/month.
Ayes (1) Zumoff
Nays (7) Coles, Seger, Berry, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan
Abstentions (1) Clairborne
Failed
Mayor Peterson stated that she has direct supervision over department heads and
some new employees are hired at a higher salary than department heads who have
worked for the City for years, and this is a creative way without raising salaries to
recognize employees who have been employed by the City of Ithaca for many years.
Main Motion:
A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (7) Coles, Seger, Berry, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan
Nays (1) Zumoff
Abstentions (1) Clairborne
Carried
Common Council - Request from Gadabout for Emergency Funding - Resolution
By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Berry
WHEREAS, the increased cost of fuel has had a negative impact on Gadabout
Transportation Services, Inc., and
WHEREAS, Gadabout has attempted to contain and reduce costs in other areas of its
operation, but the high fuel costs have led to a $55,000 operating deficit as of June
2006, and
WHEREAS, Gadabout has requested $25,000 in emergency funding for the remainder
of 2006 to help cover their deficit; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes a one-time emergency funding
to Gadabout Transportation Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $14,000, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That funds for said emergency funds shall be transferred from Account
A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to A5630-5630 Bus Operation Fees.
Alderperson Berry voiced support for the resolution.
Alderperson Coles stated that she would provide ridership information and explained
that Gadabout receives funding from other municipalities as well.
October 4, 2006
35
A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Common Council – Petition for Tompkins County Legislature - Resolution
By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Seger
WHEREAS, Tompkins County has seen approximately a five million dollar increase in
the cost of unfunded mandates, so that in the year 2003 the cost of those mandates
totaled $13,769,142 and in the year 2007, the total requested for those mandates is
$18,133,520, and
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Legislature, as all other governmental bodies, has
been faced with dramatically escalating costs in the delivery of services, and
WHEREAS, the Legislature is additionally faced with the dilemma of having to find ways
of keeping property taxes as low as possible, and
WHEREAS, both the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca understand
and share in that responsibility with the Legislature, while at the same time also sharing
concern about cuts in social and hunger programs, and
WHEREAS, cuts in social programs will result either in deeper poverty, reduction of
critical services, reduction in recreational opportunities for some county residents; or in
increased costs to residents in specific municipalities, and
WHEREAS, it will be difficult to ascertain where the municipal boundaries lie for various
needs, extreme poverty and hunger, and other social needs in our respective
municipalities, and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca understand both
the difficulty of budget decisions, as well as the fact that this is a decision solely within
the purview of the Tompkins County Legislature, now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca respectfully
petition the Tompkins County Legislature not to make the projected cuts in the lengthy
list of social programs, among which are critical ones, such as the Human Services
Coalition and the Intermunicipal Recreation Partnership
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Coles left the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations for an Permanent Off-Leash Dog
Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead Agency
By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas
WHEREAS, the Mayor’s Task Force created to consider the possibility of establishing
one or more permanent off-leash areas for dogs in the Ithaca area has recommended
that such an off-leash area be established by the City on the so-called “Festival Lands”
owned by the City, and possibly be extended on to a portion of the adjacent lands of the
Allan H. Treman State Marine Park (upon the consent of the State Park), and
WHEREAS, the City’s Parks Commission has recommended that the Festival Lands not
be used for an off-leash dog area, and
WHEREAS, other potential locations for an permanent off-leash area have been
suggested, including the City-owned land south of Cherry Street (between the railroad
and the Flood Control Channel) and the substitute parkland which is proposed to be
designated as the Southwest Natural Area, and
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176 of the City Code provide that no agency may
undertake, fund or approve an action until the agency has complied with the provisions
of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and, if it is an agency of the
City of Ithaca, with the City’s Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQRO), and
October 4, 2006
36
WHEREAS, SEQRA and CEQRO require that any action be preliminarily classified as
Type I, Type II (exempt) or unlisted, and that, from among the involved agencies for any
action, a Lead Agency be established for conducting environmental review of the action,
in accordance with state and local law, and
WHEREAS, the creation of an permanent off-leash area for dogs is an Unlisted Action
under both the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, and
WHEREAS, the involved agencies with regard to approvals that would be required for
such a proposed off-leash dog area are the Common Council and the Board of Public
Works, and, potentially, New York State Parks or the Town of Ithaca; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby declare its intent to find a suitable
site, within or in close proximity to the City of Ithaca, where a permanent, safe and
attractive off-leash area for dogs could be located; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Department of Planning and Development be directed:
(1) to identify potential locations for such an off-leash area for dogs, including but
not necessarily limited to part or all of the Festival Lands, the City-owned land
south of Cherry Street and the substitute parkland proposed to be designated
as the Southwest Natural Area,
(2) in consultation with representatives of the dog-owning community and, as
appropriate, the Natural Areas Commission and/or the Parks Commission, to
develop appropriate, proposed parameters, at least in a conceptual form, for
an permanent off-leash area at each such potential location (eg., boundaries,
required fencing, parking, etc), and
(3) to identify the potential impacts of the development of an permanent off-
leash area at each such location, pursuant to SEQRA and CEQRO;
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby declare itself to be
the Lead Agency for the environmental review of the proposed establishment of such an
a permanent off-leash dog area at the identified, potential locations, and be it further
RESOLVED, That notice of the Common Council’s intent to be the Lead Agency for this
action be provided to the Board of Public Works, New York State Parks and the Town of
Ithaca, together with a copy of Part 1 of the Environmental Assessment Form for the
action, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution is not intended to address the question of funding
which may be required to implement such an off-leash area for dogs, or to commit the
City to such funding, at any particular level or at any particular time.
Alderperson Seger explained that the Community & Neighborhood Services Committee
members supported this Resolution to find a permanent location for a dog park, and to
rescind the leash law at Allen H. Treman Marina.
Alderperson Cogan explained that there had been discussions with Tompkins County
dog owners regarding this. He stated that he has concerns regarding the environmental
quality review and the potential land swap in the area.
Motion to Postpone Item 10.1 - Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations
for a Permanent Off-Leash Dog Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead
Agency
By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas
RESOLVED, That Item 10.1 - Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations for a
Permanent Off-Leash Dog Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead Agency be
post-poned indefinitely.
Alderperson Seger stated that he would not support this motion as this was an attempt
at a thoughtful approach to find a permanent dog park.
October 4, 2006
37
A vote on the Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) Clairborne, Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan
Nays (2) Berry, Seger
Abstentions (0)
Carried
An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Entitled:
“Dogs and Other Animals,” Regarding Establishment of a Temporary Exemption
to the Leash Requirement for Dogs
By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Zumoff
WHEREAS, the Common Council, while creating the following temporary exemption to
the existing City leash law, nonetheless wishes to make clear its intent to engage in a
productive dialogue with the State of New York, and the State Parks Commission,
regarding the use and ownership of the “Festival Lands” and related issues; now
therefore be it
ORDINANCE 06-
ORDAINED AND ENACTED, by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 164 (“Dogs and Other Animals”), Article III (“Dogs”), Section 164-
9 (“Prohibited Acts”), of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, is hereby amended to read
as follows:
§164-9. Prohibited Acts.
A. Except as otherwise set forth in this Section, a Any owner of a dog or any other
person who harbors any dog in the City of Ithaca shall be in violation of this article if
such dog:
A. 1. Is not restrained by an adequate collar and leash when not on the property of
the owner or any other person harboring or having custody or control of the dog.
Exemption: Subdivision A above does not apply to owners of dogs whose dogs are
off-leash in an area to be established and designated as an off-leash dog park pilot
project sponsored by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic
Preservation and the nonprofit Tompkins County Dog Owners' Group (TCDOG). The
dog park is to be located within the boundaries of Treman Marina and the City-
owned land adjacent to it as shown on the map entitled "Proposed Dog Park Area"
dated May 1992. The part of the dog park located on City land shall be regulated by
the Board of Public Works. This exemption shall extend for the one-year trial period
of the pilot, but in no event shall this exemption extend beyond August 31, 2002
[Subsections B through I to be renumbered accordingly, ie., as 2 through 9, but
otherwise to remain unchanged.]
B. Temporary Exemption: Effective as of December 1, 2006, and for the duration
of the period described below, Subdivision A.1, above, shall not apply to owners
whose dogs are off-leash in the area owned by the City known as the “Festival
Lands,” consisting of approximately 15 acres, which area is adjacent to Allan H.
Treman State Marine Park and which area is shown as “Parcel B” on a survey
map of Cass Park dated August 15, 2001, by T.G. Miller, PC, provided that such
owners are in compliance with all rules and regulations established by the Board
of Public Works for such off-leash area. A copy of the aforementioned map (or
the portion showing the “Festival Lands”) shall be maintained in the office of the
City Clerk and posted at said off-leash area. This exemption shall continue until
December 1, 2007, unless extended by Common Council.
SECTION 2. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions
of the ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
October 4, 2006
38
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately and in
accordance with law upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas
RESOLVED, That the first two Whereas Clauses from the original Resolution be re-
inserted to read as follows:
“WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is in the process of identifying and evaluating potential,
suitable locations for one or more permanent off-leash dog areas within the City or on
City-owned lands; and
WHEREAS, while such process is underway, and without intending to influence its final
outcome in any way, Common Council wishes to ensure that there is a temporary site
for appropriate off-leash dog activity, within the City; and”
Carried Unanimously
Main Motion As Amended:
A Vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Directive for the Establishment of Rules and Regulations for Temporary Off-leash
Dog Area - Resolution
By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Clairborne
RESOLVED, That Common Council directs the Board of Public Works to establish and
post at the site appropriate rules and regulations for the use of the aforementioned
temporary, off-leash dog area, together with a map of the so-called “Festival lands,” by
or before December 1, 2006.
Alderperson Seger stated that he hopes that Tompkins County Dog Owners can work
closely with the Board of Public Works on the development of rules.
A Vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
PLANNING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
COMMITTEE:
Designation of a Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development
- Resolution
By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Zumoff
WHEREAS, The Inlet Island Urban Design Plan, which was adopted by the Common
Council in November of 1998, recommends the revitalization of Inlet Island by
developing an attractive, pedestrian-scale, urban waterfront mixed-use neighborhood,
featuring waterfront-enhanced private sector uses linked by the public waterfront
promenade, and
WHEREAS, the development site on Inlet Island is composed of approximately 2.5
acres, composed of tax parcels #52.-1-1.1, #52.-1-1.2, #52.-1-1.3, and #43.-1-4, owned
by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (“IURA”) and the City of Ithaca (“City”), and an
additional approximately 0.4 acre adjoining parcel of land (tax parcel #43.-1-5) for which
the City is in negotiations with the State of New York to acquire, and
WHEREAS, subsurface conditions of the development site appear to require remediation
of approximately 4,500 to 7,500 cubic feet of contaminated soils from bulk fuel storage
uses existing prior to City/IURA ownership, and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2005, the Common Council passed a resolution authorizing
the distribution of the Inlet Island Waterfront Development Request for Proposals (“RFP”)
and authorizing the Mayor to appoint a Selection Committee to review the responses to
the RFP, and to make a recommendation for a preferred developer to the Common
Council and the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, and
WHEREAS, the City issued the RFP, and received three proposals; one was an
incomplete proposal, and one was withdrawn, leaving one complete proposal, submitted
October 4, 2006
39
by Stephen B. Flash on behalf of a prospective Limited Liability Company, Finger Lakes
Development, LLC, to be formed if selected as the preferred developer, and
WHEREAS, Finger Lakes Development, LLC (“Developer”) is an entity to be formed with
Stephen B. Flash as managing member, and to include the three original members of the
Marina Realty of Ithaca, LLC, the company that completed environmental remediation
and development of the Boatyard Grill restaurant and that owns and manages the Ithaca
Boating Center marina, and
WHEREAS, the Stephen B. Flash/Finger Lakes Development, LLC proposal proposed
environmental remediation of the site; development of an approximately 105-room hotel
with 15 condominium units by Cayuga Visions, LLC, which will be the ultimate owner and
operator of this portion of the project; development of a five-story, 60,000 sq. ft. multi-use
building including, retail, office, and museum uses by Social Ventures, Inc.; renovation of
the existing covered boat house and enhanced public access to the waterfront; and
surface parking sufficient for this proposed project, and
WHEREAS, the proposal was reviewed by the Selection Committee, which included the
City’s consultant from the National Development Council, a representative of the Ithaca
Downtown Partnership, a Common Council member, an IURA member, a representative
from the Chamber of Commerce, a member of the City’s Conservation Advisory Council,
and a member of the Tompkins County Cayuga Lake Watershed Network, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Department of Planning & Development undertook an
analysis of parking supply and demand on Inlet Island that concluded there is a need for
additional parking, and
WHEREAS, following discussions with the Selection Committee and reviewing the
Department of Planning & Development’s study of parking supply and demand on Inlet
Island, the Developer revised its proposal to the following proposed $17 - $23 million
mixed-use project:
environmental remediation of the site
approximately 100-room hotel
15 condominium units
renovation of the existing covered marina structure and enhanced public
access to the waterfront
potential development of some retail use consistent with the waterfront
environment,
potential construction of approximately 12 apartments over the existing
marina structure, and
WHEREAS, after reviewing the proposal and having interviewed the
development team in four separate meetings, the Selection Committee
concluded that while the submitted proposal does not exactly address the City’s
ideal vision for the Inlet Island development site, the Developer has indicated its
commitment to being flexible with its development plans, and is qualified and
willing to work with the City and IURA to modify the project to address the
following issues raised by the Selection Committee:
Urban design
Employment, including work force diversity and living wages
Project scale
Public access and public spaces, especially by alternative transportation means,
including by foot, bicycle, boat and bus
Public spaces
Environmental concerns
Project accessory uses, and
WHEREAS, City Planning & Development Department staff and the Selection
Committee recommend retention of a portion of the development site for construction of
surface pubic parking to accommodate existing off-site parking needs, thereby effectively
reducing the private sector development site by approximately 0.5 acres, and
October 4, 2006
40
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency recommended the designation of
Stephen B. Flash as the Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront
Development at its September 28, 2006, meeting; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby concur with the designation by the
IURA to name Stephen B. Flash, as the Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island
Waterfront Development, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Stephen B. Flash is hereby authorized to assign the Preferred
Developer designation to Finger Lakes Development, LLC upon its creation and
disclosure to the IURA of all principals and/or members, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council recognizes that the revised development proposal
submitted is not in complete alignment with the City’s original vision for development on
Inlet Island, but the Developer and the City/IURA will work towards an agreement on the
following issues raised by the Selection Committee, and any additional issues that may
arise:
Urban design
Employment
Project scale
Project accessory uses
Public access and public spaces
Environmental concerns
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor, with the advice of the City Attorney, is hereby authorized
and directed to negotiate and sign a Preferred Developer Agreement exclusively with
Stephen B. Flash, or his City-authorized assignee, for the Inlet Island Waterfront
Development project and that this agreement shall cover topics such as:
1. Project Site – define the boundaries of the project site available for
private-sector development;
2. Site Control - provide the Developer with access and site control to seek
approvals and financing, and guarantee that the City/IURA will not sell the
project site to another developer during the term of the agreement;
3. Future Property Conveyance - identify conditions for future conveyance of
the project site to the Developer, including a schedule of project
milestones and defining the process for public input as the project
continues to be refined;
4. Developer Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of
the Developer;
5. City/IURA Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of
the City/IURA; and
6. Term – state the term of the agreement.
Alderperson Tomlan requested permission to make the changes to the original
proposal that she identified in the memo to Common Council dated September
29, 2006. She noted that these clarifications were recommended by the Ithaca
Urban Renewal Agency.
The specific wording changes included moving Whereas Clause #12 to follow
Whereas Clause #9 and adding the language:
“precluding inclusion of the proposed five-story, 60,000 sq. ft. multi-use
Building to include retail, office and museum uses by Social Ventures, Inc.,
on the site, and”.
The requested changes also include adding language to the third Resolved
Clause so it would read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That Common Council recognizes that the revised development proposal
submitted is not in complete alignment with the City’s original vision for development on
Inlet Island, but the Developer and the City/IURA will work towards an agreement on the
October 4, 2006
41
following issues raised by the Selection Committee, and any additional issues that may
arise:
Urban design
Employment, including work force diversity and living wages
Project scale
Project accessory uses
Public access, especially by alternative transportation means, including by
foot, bicycle, boat and bus
Public Spaces
Environmental concerns,
and be it further”
This proposed new language would also be reflected in Whereas Clause
#11.
No Council member objected to the incorporation of the requested changes into
the Resolution.
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
RESOLVED, That the last Resolved Clause be amended to read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That the Mayor, with the advice of the City Attorney and approval by
Common Council of the terms thereof, is hereby authorized and directed to negotiate
and sign a Preferred Developer Agreement exclusively with Stephen B. Flash, or his
City-authorized assignee, for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development project and that
this agreement shall cover topics including but not limited to:
1. Project Site – define the boundaries of the project site available for
private-sector development;
2. Site Control - provide the Developer with access and site control to seek
approvals and financing, and guarantee that the City/IURA will not sell the
project site to another developer during the term of the agreement;
3. Future Property Conveyance - identify conditions for future conveyance of
the project site to the Developer, including a schedule of project
milestones and defining the process for public input as the project
continues to be refined;
4. Developer Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of
the Developer;
5. City/IURA Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of
the City/IURA; and
6. Term – state the term of the agreement.”
Carried Unanimously (8-0)
Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the concerns that have been raised
about a major project being proposed for the site, and public access to the waterway.
Alderperson Clairborne thanked Alderperson Tomlan for bringing forth the changes
made by the IURA.
Alderperson Gelinas stated that he is not comfortable voting on this until the issue with
the land swap is settled.
Mayor Peterson stated that the developer has been very cooperative. There are
components of the plan that may be contentious, and the City would retain the ability to
disengage from the preferred developer and the plan. She further stated that the
developer is interested in working on this project with or without land swap and would
like to work cooperatively with the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
and the Coast Guard. She also stated that there is no economic incentive for
developers to continue work on this site. She further noted that it would be up to the
City to determine the process for community input and involvement in the process.
Alderperson Berry stated that she appreciates the work that the developer has done,
but there is concern regarding the perception surrounding economic development. She
October 4, 2006
42
requested more information about what the workforce diversity piece looks like and
would like to wait because she doesn’t feel that a hotel is the appropriate development
for the area.
Alderperson Zumoff stated that a lot of areas on the Island are in a deteriorated
condition and this is the start of the process, not the end. The local developer is willing
to be flexible and he strongly recommends approval of the Resolution.
Alderperson Cogan stated that he had concerns regarding the project not being in
tandem with the Inlet Island Design plan, but space is very limited. He thinks it is worth
agreeing to this status as long as elements are kept that recognize the public
promenade and pedestrian amenities.
Alderperson Seger stated that he could not support the Resolution as he would prefer a
project that would benefit a larger portion of the community. He further voiced concerns
regarding the parking issue in the area and stated that he felt this action is premature as
the City does not have full site control yet.
Motion to Call the Question:
By Alderperson Gelinas: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
RESOLVED, That the question be called on the Designation of a Preferred Developer
for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development.
Ayes (6) Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan, Clairborne
Nays (2) Berry, Seger
Abstentions (0)
Carried (6-2)
Main Motion as Amended:
A Vote on the Main Motion as amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan, Clairborne
Nays (2) Berry, Seger
Abstentions (0)
Carried (6-2)
NEW BUSINESS:
Resolution in Support of the Council of Governments’ Grant Application for New
York State Shared Municipal Services Program – Local Health Insurance Incentive
Award
By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, The City of Ithaca has joined the Tompkins County Council of
Governments, and
WHEREAS, the Council of Governments has resolved to apply for an incentive award
under the New York State Shared Municipal Services Program, and
WHEREAS, the grant will assist the municipalities in Tompkins County to create a local
health consortium, and
WHEREAS, the health care consortium will seek to develop health care coverage for all
municipalities with the intent to provide a net savings to the taxpayers of Tompkins
County, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That on recommendation of Common Council, That the Mayor is hereby
authorized to act on behalf of the City of Ithaca to all matters related to this grant, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That the County of Tompkins shall be designated as the Lead Applicant
and that the County Administrator is Authorized to act as the contact person for this
grant.
Carried Unanimously (7-0)
October 4, 2006
43
INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution to Approve A Joint Study Group to Investigate Possible Shared
Services and Possible Consolidation between the City of Ithaca and the Town of
Ithaca
By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council and the Town of Ithaca Board, desiring
to examine the mutual benefits that could be achieved through possible shared services
and possible consolidation measures, have agreed by votes at their respective
meetings of May 3, 2006, and May 8, 2006, to pursue such investigation through the
establishment of a joint study group, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council voted unanimously to create such a study group to
investigate, among others, the legal and regulatory aspects of shared services and
possible consolidation, the pros and cons of both shared services and consolidation, the
financial opportunities and liabilities of consolidation or shared services, an analysis of
the property and sales tax scenario for a single jurisdiction, the concept of a new
jurisdiction, and a unified comprehensive plan, and to provide an analysis of the
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for each topic area, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council voted that the study group would be composed of
eight “at-large” members, mutually agreed upon by the City of Ithaca Common Council
and the Town of Ithaca Board, with these representatives having knowledge of finance,
law, planning, public works, police, or organizational culture, plus one elected official
liaison from each jurisdiction, making a total of ten members, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council directed that such study group and its chair be
nominated by a joint City-Town nomination committee consisting of the Mayor, the
Supervisor, one Common Council member, and one Town Board member, and
WHEREAS, the nomination committee, consisting of Mayor Carolyn K. Peterson,
Supervisor Cathy Valentino, Alderperson Mary Tomlan, and Councilor Peter Stein, has
met three times, beginning June 26, 2006, and
WHEREAS, the nominating committee has agreed to put forward the names of eight
“at-large” study group members, all of whom have agreed to serve, being Lois E.
Chaplin, Paul R. Eberts, Nathan Fawcett, Randy Haus, Tom Niederkorn, Wendy
Skinner, Stuart W. Stein, and Constance V. Thompson, with Wendy Skinner nominated
and agreed to serve as chair, and
WHEREAS, Mayor Peterson has nominated Mary Tomlan to serve as the elected
official liaison from the Common Council; and
WHEREAS, each municipality has agreed to provide staff assistance to the study group,
including participation from each municipality’s historian; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca concurs in the naming of
the above-cited individuals to the joint City-Town study group.
Nominees to City of Ithaca-Town of Ithaca joint study group
Lois E. Chaplin, Extension Associate, Department of Biological and
Environmental Engineering, Cornell University; Bicycle and Pedestrian
Specialist, Cornell Local Roads Program
Paul R. Eberts, Professor, Department of Development Sociology, and
Director of Graduate Studies for the Field of Community and Rural
Development, Cornell University
Nathan Fawcett, Special Assistant to the Provost for State-Related Issues,
Cornell University; Tompkins Public Library Treasurer and Trustee;
formerly served with New York State Division of Budget
October 4, 2006
44
Randy Haus, Trumansburg Police Department; former Deputy Police
Chief, City of Ithaca; former Tompkins County Undersheriff
Tom Niederkorn, Principal, Planning & Environmental Research
Consultants; former City of Ithaca Planning Director
Wendy Skinner, Marketing and Communications Manager, Tompkins
Consolidated Area Transit; active in Sustainable Tompkins; former
Tompkins County Public Information Officer
Stuart W. Stein, former Member and Chair, Tompkins County Board of
Representatives; Professor Emeritus, Department of City and Regional
Planning, Cornell University
Constance V. Thompson, Manager, Recruitment and Diversity
Recruitment, Recruitment and Employment Center, Cornell University;
Steering Committee Member, Alliance for Community Empowerment
(ACE)
Alderperson Seger questioned why this item did not go through the Governance and
Intermunicipal Relations Committee before coming to Common Council for approval.
He further asked if this Committee would report to the Governance and Intermunicipal
Relations Committee in the future.
Mayor Peterson explained that the way the Resolution is written is that the Committee
would be reporting directly to Common Council.
A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously (7-0)
Alderperson Gelinas left the meeting at 10:35 p.m.
Motion to Adjourn into Executive Session to Discuss a Personnel Issue –
Resolution
By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Berry
RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to discuss a
personnel issue.
Carried Unanimously (6-0)
Alderperson Cogan left the meeting at 10:37 p.m.
Reconvene:
Common Council reconvened back into Regular Session with no formal action taken.
Commitment to the Implementation of the 2006 Economic Development Strategy
for Tompkins County - Resolution
Due to lack of quorum, this item was not discussed nor voted upon. It will be placed on
the agenda for the November Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. due to lack of quorum.
______________________________ _______________________________
Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Carolyn K. Peterson,
City Clerk Mayor