The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995.10.03_OPWA AgendaPUBLIC NOTICE OF THE MEETING OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY TYPE OF MEETING: Regular DATE: October 3, 1995 TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, Owasso Community Center Notice and Agenda filed in the office of the City Clerk and posted on the City Hall bulletin board at 4:00 p.m. on Friday, September 29, 1995. Marcia Boutwell, City Clerk AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Invocation Pastor Linzy Slayden Friendship Baptist Church 3. Flag Salute 4. Roll Call 5. Request Approval of the Minutes of September 19, 1995 Regular Meeting. Attachment ##5 r� Owasso Public Works Authority , October 3, 1995 Page 2 6. Request Approval of Claims , Attachment #6 1 7. Request to Address the Trustees Regarding Drainage South of 76th Street. Mr Downey ' Attachment #7 Mr Jim Downey has requested an opportunity to address the Trustees concerning ' drainage on his property. 8. Consideration and Appropriate Action Relating to a Request for Trustee Action for a Review of the Staff Interpretation and Administration of OPWA Resolution #93 -05. Mr Turnbaugh Mr Ray Attachment #8 Correspondence from a water customer of the Authority has been received and reviewed by the staff. The customer requests a Trustee review of the staff administration of a rate - setting resolution. Staff reports will be presented to the Trustees indicating the basis for the current interpretation of the resolution. 1 Owasso Public Works Authority October 3, 1995 Page 3 9. Consideration and Appropriate Action Relating to OPWA Resolution #95 -07, a Resolution Amending OPWA Resolution #93 -05. Mr Ray Attachment #9 A customer of the Authority has specifically requested Trustee action to charge all Pleasant View Subdivision customers "in- city" water rates. Such a request, if approved, will require modification /amendment to the existing OPWA Resolution #93 -05. 10. Report from OPWA Manager 11. Report from OPWA Attorney 12. Unfinished Business 13. New Business Owasso Public Works Authority ' October 3, 1995 Page 4 14. Adjournment d No is W OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, September 19, 1995 The Owasso Public Works Authority met in regular session on Tuesday, September 19, 1995 in the Council Chambers at the Owasso Community Center per the Notice of Public Meeting and Agenda posted on the City Hall bulletin board at 4:00 p.m. on Friday, September 15, 1995. ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairman Ewing called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. ITEM 2: INVOCATION The invocation was given Pastor David Phillippe of the New Life Assembly of God Church. ITEM 3: FLAG SALUTE The flag salute was led by Vice Mayor Ewing. ITEM 4: ROLL CALL PRESENT Danny Ewing, Vice Chairperson Mary Lou Barnhouse, Trustee Michael Helm, Trustee STAFF Rodney J Ray, City Manager Ronald D Cates, Authority Attorney Marcia Boutwell, Authority Secretary A quorum was declared present. ABSENT Charles Burris, Chairperson Joe Ramey, Trustee ' ITEM 5: REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5. 1995 REGULAR MEETING. 1 Mr Helm moved to approve the minutes as written, by reference hereto; seconded by Ms Barnhouse. AYE: Helm, Barnhouse, Ewing NAY: None Motion carried 3 -0. Owasso Public Works Authority September 19, 1995 ITEM 6: REQUEST APPROVAL OF CLAIMS ' Ms Barnhouse moved, seconded by Mr Helm, to approve the following claims as submitted: ' (1) OPWA Fund $151,749.88; (2) OPWA Capital Improvement Fund $262,900.60; (3) Payroll $26,026.63. AYE: Barnhouse, Helm, Ewing ' NAY: None IR Motion carried 3 -0. ITEM 7: REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE TRUSTEES REGARDING RURAL WATER I RATES. Mr Bill Witt, who resides in the Prairie View Addition, addressed the Council concerning water ' rates in that area. Mr Witt was not one of the customers acquired from Rogers County Rural Water District #3, and as a new rural customer did not qualify for the "in- city" rate given to customers acquired from Rogers Water District #3. Mr Witt felt that all customers in the area should pay the same rate. Mr Mike Turnbaugh, who has recently moved to the Prairie View Addition, also spoke about the inequity of water rates. They requested that the Trustees consider taking action to equalize the rates. ITEM 8: CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATING TO A REQUEST TO AWARD A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL REFUSE CONTAINERS (POLYCARTS) AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN INITIAL ORDER OF 100 CARTS AT $5950. Each year the OPWA solicits bids for the purchase of carts to be used in the residential refuse collection program. For the carts to be purchased for FY95 -96, bid packets were mailed to ten vendors and notice was published in the newspaper. Three bids were received and opened on September 12, 1995. Bids were received from Williams Refuse, Owasso; Solid Waste Systems, Charlotte, NC; and IPL Products, Worcester, MA. Of the three, only Williams Refuse met the specifications. The specifications require the bottom of the tub to be a minimum of six inches above the ground and protected. This requirement assures that the carts do not drag the ground and wear out as quickly as those that do not have that requirement. Mr Helm moved, seconded by Ms Barnhouse, to award a contract for the purchase of residential refuse containers for a time period through June 30, 1996 to Williams Refuse Equipment Co Inc, Owasso, OK, at a cost of $59.50 per green polycart and $61.50 per red polycart, and to authorize payment of $5950 for the purchase of an initial order of 100 green carts. IOwasso Public Works Authority September 19, 1995 ' AYE: Helm, Barnhouse, Ewing NAY: None Motion carried 3 -0. ITEM 9: CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATING TO OPWA RESOLUTION #95 -06. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER RATES FOR CUSTOMERS OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City of Tulsa has increased water rates to its municipal customers effective October 1, 1995. That increase will cost the city an additional ten cents per thousand gallons. OPWA Resolution #95 -06 provides for an increase to City of Owasso customers in the amount of the rate increase from the City of Tulsa. The proposed rate change is ten cents per thousand gallons for in -city customers and seven cents per thousand gallons for rural customers. Those rates are consistent with a policy approved in 1993 of a phased in program to equalize the rate difference between in -city and rural customers. Ms Barnhouse moved, seconded by Mr Helm, to approve OPWA Resolution #95 -06, providing for an increase in water rates to our customers in the amount of the rate increase to the city. AYE: Barnhouse, Helm, Ewing NAY: None ' Motion carried 3 -0. t ITEM 10: CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR TRUSTEE APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN WASHINGTON COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT #3 AND THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FOR EMERGENCY WATER SERVICE. ' The City of Owasso water distribution system presently serves customers on the north side of 126th Street North through a single water line. If that main line should break, many customers would be out of water until a repair could be made. A proposed agreement with Washington County Rural Water District #3 would transfer the North Dale Acres service area from OPWA to Washington County RWD #3, emergency service interconnections, and emergency water service to OPWA not to exceed 125,000 gallons per day at an initial emergency rate of $1.75 ' per thousand gallons. Mr Helm moved, seconded by Ms Barnhouse to approve an agreement with Washington County Rural Water District #3 transferring service in North Dale Acres from OPWA to RWD #3 and providing emergency water service interconnections and service in accordance with the provisions of the contract, and authorizing the Chair to execute the documents. P 3 Owasso Public Works Authority September 19, 1995 AYE: Helm, Barnhouse, Ewing NAY: None Motion carried 3 -0. ITEM 11: REPORT FROM OPWA MANAGER No report. ITEM 12: REPORT FROM OPWA ATTORNEY No report. ITEM 13: UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mr Helm questions the water usage on the bill that Mr Turnbaugh provided, and asked staff to check the accuracy of the bill. ITEM 14: NEW BUSINESS None. ITEM 15: ADJOURNMENT Mr Helm moved, seconded by Ms Barnhouse, to adjourn. AYE: Helm, Barnhouse, Ewing NAY: None Motion carried 3 -0 and the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Marcia Boutwell, Authority Secretary 2 Charles L Burris, Chairperson Ly r 9/29/95 10:03:36 r i CTTY OF OWASSO OWASSn PUBLTr_. WORKS AUTHORTTY A/P CLA.TMS REPORT APAPVR PAGE: R PO it VENDOR DESCRTPTTnN AMDTTNT ---- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- OPWA ADMTNTSTRATTON ------------------------ - - - - -- 960002 LIBERTY TULSA REVENUE BnNDS 960006 CPS BUSTNESS. INC. LICENSE FEES 9601.24 US POSTMASTER UTILITY BTLL POSTAGE 960125 AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOC TPATNTNG 960153 A.MTEC SnUTHEAST, TNC. SOFTWARE MATNT 960414 MEMBER SFRVTCF LIFE PRE -TAY ADMTN FEE 960598 ALL COPY SUPPLIES TnNEP CARTRIDGES 960625 OFFICE DEPOT CARD PLAN SUPPLTES 960710 ENR, THE MCGPAW -HILL SURSCPTPTTnN 960750 PSO 8/95 USE 960752 SOUTHWESTERN BELL TFLE 8/95 PT.EYAP 960754 OKLA NATURAL GAS 8/95 USE 960755 MCI TFLECOMMTTNTCATTONS 4/95 USF DEPARTMENT TOTAL.. = = = =? WATEP. ------------------------ - - - - -- 960516 GARY MOSER 960555 WATER PRODUCTS TNC 960557 WATER PRODUCTS INr 960579 TYRONE DTNKINS 960580 OSCAR MCT -AURTN 9A0582 JOHNNY ROGERS 960592 7EE MFDTCAL SFRVTCE 96 ()659 WATER PRODUCTS TNC 960750 PSO 960751 SOUTHWESTERN RF.LL, TFLE 96075? SOUTHWESTERN BELL TFLE 960755 MCI TEL.ECOMMTJNICATTnNS DEPARTMENT TOTAL = = = =) WASTEWATER ------------------------ - - - - -- METER RFADTNG PAPTS -133 F AVE!BTRCH WATER MFTEPR 1 ()/10/94 METER READTN(7, METER READTNG METER READTNG FIRST ATT) YTTS /SUPPLTES METER SET MAT_ERTALS 8/95 USF 8/95 NON- PL.EYAP 8/95 PT.FXAR 8/95 TTSF, 50,10 ?.9? 217.00 1.500.0() 15(),00 9q, 00 69.6? 69,00 ?46.10 1 R.9q 9. ?4 5? 77 ?.1I 196, AS q7.97 1,500.0() ?53.75 554,45 :3.60 A01 .74 101.. ?5 6R. 97 24,()3 1.?4 ?,554.80 160,00 ?1 .59 166,80 6. AR 5,909,9? 4'5.75 847,05 960597 SHERRY LABORATOPTES, TNC. ST.UDGE ANALYSTS ' 9.50650 CONSOLIDATED PLASTIrS RECYCLE RTNS 960AAI WASTE MANAGEMENT OF OVT.A ST.TTDGF DTSPOSAL 9/95 960687 TREASURER PETTY CASH RFTMB PETTY CASH ' 960 750 PSO 0/95 TTSR 960751 SOUTHWESTERN BF11. TFT.F 4/95 NON- PI:EXAR 960751 SOUTHWESTERN BELL TFLE 8/95 NON- PLEyAR 1 50,10 ?.9? 217.00 1.500.0() 15(),00 9q, 00 69.6? 69,00 ?46.10 1 R.9q 9. ?4 5? 77 ?.1I 196, AS q7.97 1,500.0() ?53.75 554,45 :3.60 A01 .74 101.. ?5 6R. 97 24,()3 1.?4 ?,554.80 160,00 ?1 .59 166,80 6. AR 5,909,9? 4'5.75 847,05 CTTY OF OWASSn OWASSO PITBT,Tr. WORKS ATTTHORTTY 9/?9/95 1t1.03;?6 A/P CT.ATMS PFPnRT AF'AfiVR PA.t;F; PO # VENDOR DFSCPTPTTOTT AMnTTNT ---- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- 960752 SOUTHWESTERN FELL TET.F R/95 PT.FXAP 4R, i7 960754 nKL.A NATURAL GAS 8/95 USE -0.79 960755 MCT TELECOMMUNTCATTONS R/95 USP 3.00 DEPARTMENT TOTAL. 65PR0.45 REFUSE COLLECTIONS ------------------------ - - - - -- 960410 WILLIAMS REFUSE EATTIPMENT POT.Yr_.ARTS 10/18/94 5,900.00 960520 WILLIAMS REFUSE EQUIPMENT POLYCARTS 10/18/94 3,050.00 960592 ZEE MEDICAL SERVTCE FIRST AID HITS /SUPPLIES 168.31 960651 M.E.T. MEMBERSHTP DiTES 1. ?60,71 DEPARTMENT TOTAL- t0.479.02 RECYCLE CENTER ------------------------ - - - - -- 960287 AT &T PRINTER PAPER 9~0750 PSO R/95 TTSE 134.7 960759 SOUTHWESTERN BELL TET.F 8/95 PLEXAR 24.03 DEPARTMENT TOTAL, ____> 21.5.71 FUND TOTAL 7?, 904.17 9 cT?Y op OWASnO OpnA CA9T7AL TmPROVFMSN7 FUND 9/29/95 10:03:36 A/P CT.ATMR- REPORT 4?A9nR PAGE: | ~� PO # VENDOR nE5C9TP?lON AMOUNT | __________ _________________________ _________________________ _____________ 0A5?SW&?ER ______________________________ 960243 FRC INC. WW?P DGSIGN-5/161/95 960405 PBDPE5SIO0&L 137S TNDVS?RT GEO?SCRNTCAL SVS 7/18/95 960552 INSI?UPORM PL&I05 THC qRWER RPB&R IT 4/4/95 DEPARTMENT TOTAL ====> 21,100.00 3,568.25 790. 00 45,458.25 ------------- 45,458.25 lO CITY OF OWASSO OPWA A/P TRANSFER REPORT VENDOR DESCRIPTION TRANSFERS CITY GARAGE TRANSFER FROM OPWA WORKERS' COMP SELF -INS TRANSFER FROM OPWA GENERAL FUND TRANSFER FROM OPWA TRANSFERS TOTAL AMOUNT 5,125.00 3,842.50 25,265.67 34, 233.17 OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY PAYROLL PAYMENT REPORT PAY PERIOD ENDING 09/16/95 DEPARTMENT Water OVERTIME TOTAL EXPENSES EXPENSES 388.26 4.625.90 Refuse 0.00 3,767.78 OPWA Capital Improvement 23.76 1,074.94 APPROVE 10/03/95 Chairman Trustee Trustee 1 I MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN & TRUSTEES OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY 1 FROM: RODNEY J RAY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY RELATING TO DRAINAGE SOUTH OF 76TH STREET - JIM DOWNEY DATE: September 28, 1995 BACKGROUND: Mr & Mrs Downey reside on 76th Street, south of the Elm Creek subdivision. A small "creek" is located on the eastern edge of their property and carries storm water from portions of the city south to Bird Creek. The Downeys have in the past, requested the city to "clear and straighten" the channel of the creek. Several months ago an agreement between the county and city was signed by the city and sent to the county for execution. That agreement called for a joint effort to address the Downey request (the Downey property lies outside the city's corporate limits). However, the county has not executed the agreement. ' After several months of delay, the city finally accepted the fact that promised help from the county was not to be expected. Public Works Department crews began working on the project in August and have completed all of the work on the Downey property. It should be noted that additional work downstream from the Downeys is still needed, but the magnitude of the remaining work is such that the project can go no further without county assistance. I" Mr & Mrs Downey have requested an opportunity to address the Trustees (see attached) in +w reference to the drainage project. In conformance with our policy, they have been placed on the agenda as requested. The staff is unaware of any continuing concerns the Downeys have about the project, and anticipate they simply want to thank the Authority for the work completed. ' Attached for your review are memoranda from previous meetings. If you have questions, please call Mr Carr or me. IATTACHMENTS: 1. Correspondence dated September 25, 1995 from Mr & Mrs Downey 2. Minutes of Council meeting of June 6, 1995 3. Memorandum dated March 3, 1995 A` 4. Memorandum dated December 14, 1994 r„ 5. Memorandum dated November 11, 1994 3. Memorandum dated nf- ii, 1 Owasso City Council June 20, 1995 ' AYE: Barnhouse, Ewin g, Rame y, Helm , Burris NAY: None Motion carried 5 -0 and the meeting was recessed at 7:25 p. m. and reconvened at 8:10 p. m. ITEM 9: REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JUNE 6. 1995 REGULAR MEETING AND JUNE 13, 1995 SPECIAL MEETING. ' Ms Barnhouse moved, seconded by Mayor Burris, to approve the minutes as submitted, by reference made a part hereto. AYE: Barnhouse, Burris, Ramey, Helm, Ewing NAY: None Motion carried 5 -0. ITEM 10: REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE CLAIMS. Mr Ramey moved, seconded by Ms Barnhouse, that the following claims be approved: ' (1) General Fund $36,555.47; (2) Workers Comp Self- Insurance $336.40; (3) Ambulance Service Fund $2,572.38; (4) City Garage $1,319.75; (5) Capital Improvements $888.37; (6) Interfund Transfers $6,721.27; (7) General Fund Payroll $108,942.85; (8) City Garage ' Payroll $1,967.06. ' AYE: Ramey, Barnhouse, Helm, Ewing, Burris NAY: None ' Motion carried 5 -0. ITEM 11: REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL REGARDING RUNOFF WATER. ' Mr Jim Downey addressed the Council regarding flooding on his property caused by runoff and requested the Council's assistance in solving the problem. Mr Downey referred to a letter he received in November stating that work would begin in 40 -45 days to clear the creek. Mr Downey said that he didn't think the city had upheld what was agreed to. Mr Ray responded that the city has completed a survey of the area, prepared the required easements, and adopted the necessary interlocal agreements. Tulsa County has not yet approved the interlocal agreements and has not provided the equipment and manpower as promised. Mr Ray said that he would go to the County Commission and make an appeal on behalf of the Downeys. �► Mayor Burris declared a recess at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m. 3 L TO: Cris King General Supervisor Ron Easterling Engineering Technician FROM: F. Robert Carr Public Works Director X COPY TO: Rodney J. Ray City Manager SUBJECT: DOWNEY DRAINAGE EASEMENT MAINTENANCE DATE: March 3, 1995 Mr. Ray has indicated that he has continued to get calls from Mr. Downey about our lack of action on cutting out the trees on his drainage easement. I recognize that this project has been in my court for the last 3-4 weeks, however. I still believe it is in our best interests to coordinate the project with Tulsa County, but we can still take some actions now to keep Mr. Downey satisfied. here are the steps I believe we need to follow on this project: 1. Stake out the east property line of the easement (and Mr. Downey's property). We need to go through the Downey property and the property to the south of Mr. Downey. 2. Provide Mr. Downey with a roll of plastic tape. Ask him to tie some tape around each tree he definitely wants to save when the trees are cut down. 3. Contact the tree removal people and have them start to get the trees cut down. They will need to leave enough stump to enable the dozer to push out the residual. 4. After the trees have been cut down, take elevations along the ditch line to be able to establish a grade for the dozer. We should prepare a simple sketch to show the ' Page 2 Downey Drainage elevations and the alignment of the ditch. r 5. At this stage, we may need to have a coordination meeting with County Engineering to ensure the alignment will not create downstream problems for the County. Please start this process next week (week of March 6th). Provide a schedule as to the expected phases of work. I L n 1 1 hIl ►I • :: ►11 1►� TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CITY OF OWASSO FROM: RODNEY J RAY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: DRAINAGE FACILITY SOUTH OF 76TH STREET NORTH BETWEEN HIGHWAY 169 AND 129TH EAST AVENUE DATE: December 14, 1994 BACKGROUND• Oklahoma law provides a mechanism by which local governmental units may enter into agreements with each other to construct, improve and repair any public facility. These agreements are most often found in situations where one unit can provide facilities or right -of- way which inures to the benefit of the other, or both, units. Mr and Mrs Downey appeared at the November 15th City Council meeting to outline to the Council the problems encountered with drainage on their property. As a result of an on -site meeting November 18, 1994 with the Downeys, John Cramer, Commissioner Lewis Harris, Tom Van Hoose, Mayor Duke, Robert Carr, and me, there was a commitment for a joint City /County project. The scope of the work is to straighten and clear the existing drainage channel which runs along the eastern edge of their property, from 76th Street North to a point approximately 300 feet south of their property line. The County has agreed to provide a tracked bulldozer and one operator, and the City has committed labor, vehicles and tools. The cost to the City is in the way of labor for two employees for whatever time is required, plus chainsaws, fuel, oil, and other tools necessary to clear the drainage channel. In addition to the agreement, it will be necessary for the City to obtain a temporary construction easement and stormwater drainage easement from both property owners, to which they have agreed in principle. The stormwater drainage problem is caused by housing developments to the north, and can be expected to be exacerbated by continued housing and commercial development. Drainage Facility Agreement December 14, 1994 Page 2 RECONEWENDATION: Staff recommends Council approval of the proposed agreement and that the Mayor be authorized to execute such agreement on behalf of the City. 1 ■ ATTACHMENT: Proposed agreement for construction of a drainage facility. [l AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made the day of , 1994, by and between the Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, hereinafter called "COUNTY" and the City of Owasso, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, hereinafter called "CITY ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, by virtue of 74 O.S. 1991, Section 1001, local governmental units are permitted to enter into agreements with each other to construct, improve and repair any public facilities, and; WHEREAS, the County is desirous of participating in projects and the provision of services mutually advantageous to the COUNTY and other units of government; THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The duration of this agreement shall be for a period equal to the time necessary to complete the project described herein, based upon the COUNTY'S work schedule. 2. The purpose of this agreement shall be for the construction of a drainage facility south of 76th Street North, per the construction plans provided. I 3. The CITY shall provide for all required right -of -way, utility relocation, engineering plans, and maintenance. ' 4. The COUNTY shall provide all labor and equipment required to complete the project. I S. This agreement shall be effective from and after the date of execution thereof and is intended only for the purpose detailed in Section 2 above. 6. The rights, duties and obligations under or arising from this agreement shall not be assigned by either party hereto without the express written consent of the other. ' APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant District Attorney ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TULSA COUNTY, OKLAHOMA County Clerk Chairman DATE: Owasso City Council December 20, 1994 Barnhouse to approve the lease agreement with the Tulsa City- County Health Department and authorize the Mayor to execute the document. AYE: Ramey, Barnhouse, Ewing, Burris NAY: None Motion carried 4 -0. ITEM 12: CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATING TO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OWASSO AND TULSA COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPROVING A DRAINAGEWAY SOUTH OF 76TH STREET AND WEST OF 122ND EAST AVENUE. Mr & Mrs Robert Downey, who live outside the city limits, have requested city assistance in correcting a drainage problem on their property caused by housing developments within the city limits. Tulsa County has agreed to provide a tracked bulldozer and one operator to straighten and clear the existing drainage channel which runs along the eastern edge of Mr & Mrs Downey's property, from 76th Street North to a point approximately 300 feet south of their property line. The City will provide two employees, plus chainsaws, fuel, oil, and other tools necessary to clear the drainage channel. Oklahoma law provides for an interlocal agreement for work such as this to occur. Mr Ewing moved to approve an agreement with Tulsa County for the proposed work and that the Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement. Motion seconded by Mr Ramey. AYE: Ewing, Ramey, Barnhouse, Burris NAY: None Motion carried 4 -0. ITEM 13: CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATING TO N INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OWASSO AND TULSA COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A "DRY FIRE HYDRANT" FOR USE BY THE OWASSO FIRE DEPARTMENT,' Because of the lack of fire fighting resources in most rural areas, INCOG studied the feasibility of installing dry hydrants in rural areas. A dry hydrant is a pipe system permanently installed ' in existing water sources to supply water to afire vehicle. INCOG has offered to provide the materials necessary to install one hydrant in each city in the Tulsa area. Tulsa County has agreed to provide the equipment and labor. There will be no cost to the City of Owasso. A suitable location has been identified at 8707 E 96th St N and the property owner has given his consent. Oklahoma law provides for an interlocal agreement for work such as this to occur. Z t TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CITY OF OWASSO FROM: RODNEY J RAY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REQUEST BY CITIZEN TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL DATE: November 11, 1994 BACKGROUND: a'v Billie and Jim Downey, 12020 E 76th St N, have requested an opportunity to address the City Council in relation to flooding along a creek that flows through their property. The Downeys live immediately south of 76th Street (outside the city's corporate limits) in the area of the Elm Creek addition. They have lived there for more than twenty-five years. Their property includes an old creek that receives all of the stormwater runoff from the Elm Creek addition and other subdivisions located north of Elm Creek addition. Recently, the Baptist Retirement Center began expanding into the vacant area west a their original location. During the platting process, they were required to provide detenhin accordance with our subdivision policies. Mr and Mrs Downey are concerned that the additional development will cause more flooding to their property. NOTES: 1. Based on runoff calculations, the detention requirements imposed on the Baptist Retirement Center should ensure that no more water will be added to the creek or at a faster speed than prior to development. The staffs position is that the Baptist Center development will not add to the water level in .the creek. 2. It appears that when the first phases of Elm Creek were platted, the developer was not required to provide detention. Later, when remaining portions of Elm Creek were developed, Elm Creek Park was used to provide detention. Based on that development scenario, it appears that the Downeys biggest impact came from the 1978 development of Elm Creek Estates First Addition and Elm Creek Estates North & South Part, Blocks 12 -15. Request to Address Council November 11, 1994 Page 2 3. Later subdivisions were required to meet runoff requirements and, though they may result in water staying in the creek longer, they should not have significantly increased the amount of water in the creek at one time. Though I have visited the site previously and had discussions with Billie and Jim, I am not sure what steps they will request the Council take to address their concerns. If you have questions, please call Mr Rooney or me or, if you want a site visit, please let me know so I can make arrangements with Mr & Mrs Downey. MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND TRUSTEES ' OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FROM: RODNEY J RAY ' CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REQUEST BY A UTILITY CUSTOMER FOR A REVIEW OF THE ' STAFF INTERPRETATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF OPWA RESOLUTION #93 -05 DATE: BACKGROUND: September 29, 1995 On August 29, 1995, the staff received correspondence from Mr Bill Witt, a resident of Pleasant View subdivision and a customer of the OPWA. The correspondence referred to the differing water rates in his subdivision and requested an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Trustees. Subsequently, on September 19, 1995, Mr Witt did appear before the Trustees to present his grievance relating to the differing water rates. Accompanying Mr Witt on that occasion was Mr Mike Turnbaugh, also a resident of the Pleasant View subdivision. Mr Turnbaugh also addressed the Trustees and expressed his concern relative to a similar, but slightly different, situation. Mr Turnbaugh is a new resident of the Pleasant View subdivision. He has purchased an existing structure from Owners who had occupied the property prior to the Authority's assumption of water service responsibility for the area. Upon the change of ownership, the City changed his water rates from the "in- city" rate provided the previous owners, to the higher rural rate paid by all other rural customers. That action was taken by the staff because of an interpretation of the language contained in OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and because the staff was aware of the intent of the language contained within that resolution. It was, and continues to be, the staff's opinion that the rate protection afforded to the customers who were previously served by the Rogers County Rural Water District is expressly reserved for those persons who were customers of the district at the time of the acquisition. In fact, the Trustees specifically addressed the issue of differing rates by directing the staff to develop a formula that would use all new net revenue from the acquired area to eventually equalize the rural rates with the in -city rates. One member of the Authority questioned the staff at the time of the adoption of the resolution as to the impact of the rate protection if a home was sold. The staff answer was that the resolution language would require the rates to be changed to reflect the rural rates. The Trustee had been concerned that all rates be equalized as soon as possible and did not want new customers to receive the rate protection. Subsequently, the Authority approved the resolution on a four (4) to one (1) vote. REVIEW OF OPWA RESOLUTION #93 -05 September 29, 1995 Page 2 Since the current staff was instrumental in developing the acquisition concept and, in fact, participated in the drafting of the resolution that implemented that concept (including the long term equalization of rates), there has never been any question as to the method of administering the rates established by the resolution. It is the staff's position that the resolution clearly specifies that only those customers who were Rogers Water District #3 customers are afforded any rate protection. In very clearly setting forth the intent of the resolution, the language specifically states which customers are not afforded such protection, to wit: "All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma as of November 1. 1993 are to be charged the following: First 1000 gallons $11.47 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1000 gallons $4.61. " However, on September 21, 1995, the staff received correspondence from Mr Turnbaugh that contained a differing interpretation of the resolution (see attached). Mr Turnbaugh's correspondence indicates he believes the rates established by the resolution should be applied to the property rather than the owner. Essentially, his position is that the rate protection should be afforded to the property, regardless of ownership or date of ownership. After receiving Mr Turnbaugh's correspondence, the staff reviewed the resolution's history and all memoranda that preceded its adoption. Additional discussions were conducted with those who participated in the process, and a City Attorney's opinion was requested. The result of those activities indicate that at least one former Trustee, Mr Bob Randolph, believed the intent was to afford the rate protection to the property. Two other former Council members, Mr Phillips and Mr Bowen, have indicated their agreement with the staff interpretation that the rates would change if the ownership changed. Additionally, the City Attorney has opinioned that the rate protection was afforded the owner and not the property (see City Attorney's Opinion #95 -03 attached). THE ISSUE: The issue before the Authority is clearly one of interpretation. The staff has administered the rate resolution in a manner consistent with its understanding of the intent of the Trustees. However, a customer has challenged that interpretation and administration and has requested that the Trustees review the staffs's interpretation, and specifically that the Authority's policy relating REVIEW OF OPWA RESOLUTION #93 -05 September 29, 1995 Page 3 to the administration of the resolution be changed and adjustments be made to his rates. Such a request is valid and will require the Trustees to determine the intent of the resolution, thus establishing policy relating to the administration of the resolution. OPTIONS: The staff can find but two options for the Trustees to consider: OPTION ONE - Determine that the intent of the resolution was for the rate protection to be afforded to the property regardless of ownership, and direct the staff to ensure that in -city rates be charged to all customers living in structures that were in place as of November 1, 1993 (in the affected area). The impact of that action would be that all property that had a water tap as of November 1, 1993, would pay the in -city rate as long as the tap continued to be in service. The financial impact on current revenues is neutral, however, there is a financial impact on the eventual equalization of all rates (slight impact). OPTION TWO - Continue the staff administration of the resolution as it is currently interpreted based on the opinion of the City Attorney. RECOM IENDATION: Due to the nature of the request, that being a request to review a staff interpretation, a staff recommendation in this issue would not be unbiased. However, the City Attorney Opinion in this matter has validated the staff's interpretation and should be the determining factor in this decision. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Correspondence from Mr Turnbaugh dated September 20, 1995 2. City Attorney's Opinion #95 -03 3. OPWA Resolution #93 -05 4. Memorandum dated February 12, 1993 5. Memorandum dated February 25, 1993 6. Memorandum dated November 11, 1993 7. Contract between OPWA and Rural Water District #3, Rogers County INOTE - A copy of this document is being sent to Mr Turnbaugh. 1 DATE: September 20, 1995 TO: Mr. Rodney Ray Owasso City Manager P.O. Box 180 207 So. Cedar Owasso, OK 74055 ': __._....__.i .. t t s` f 21 19- t: ire iW yH r.0 aya �+.. ur r .. aawaa SUBJECT: Water Rate Structure of Pleasant View Estates First I would like to thank commissioners, Mary Lou Barnhouse and Michael Helm, the city attorney Ron Cates, the vice mayor Danny Ewing, and yourself for allowing me to voice my concerns at the September 191th, 1995 meeting. The documents you supplied me, Rural Water District #3 purchase contract, Ordinance 4471, and Exhibit A, clearly identify the applicable water rates for existing and future properties /homes in the Pleasant View Estates area. After reviewing the documents with my legal council there is a concern as to what the term "customer" is interpreted to mean. i.e. Is the "customer" the home being served or the person(s) living in it? My council feels that individual water taps /meters are assigned to the existing property /home, not the "owner of record" of said property at the time. Granted the "owner of record" is responsible for the water usage and associated billings however this responsibility, as well as the original water use agreement, are transferred to subsequent "owners of record" when a sale or transfer of said "PROPERTY" is made. When interpreted in this manner the "customer" is the "home" and not necessarily the residents. My purchase contract of the property clearly transfered "all rights, titles, and interests" at the time of closing. The water tap /meter originally assigned to the property is clearly one of those rights. Also, since the structure was in place prior to Nov. 11st, 1993 there is no justification for an adjustment in the water rates. It appears to me that Exhibit "A" was designed to accommodate new construction and is not intended to allow for an adjustment of the water rates on structures /homes with taps /meters existing prior to Nov. 11st, 1993 even though a transfer of ownership occurs. I am requesting that the City of Owasso review their interpretation /intent of Exhibit "A" and implement the appropriate adjustments to my water /sewer rates. If you have any questions I can be contacted at wk:561 -6180 or hm:274 -8611. Sir rel v Mike Turnbaugh 9301 N. 136 E. Ave. Owasso, OK 74055 c.c. Ron Cates 207 South Cedar PO Box 180 Owasso, OK 74055 September 26, 1995 City of Owasso (918) 272 -2251 FAX (918) 272 -4999 RE: REQUEST FOR OPINION RELATING TO WATER RATES ESTABLISHED BY ' OPWA RESOLUTION #93 -05 AND APPROVED BY ORDINANCE #471 Dear Mr Cates: Please consider this correspondence as an official request for a City Attorney's opinion relating to water rates charged by the Owasso Public Works Authority. Specifically, the question below ' refers to rates charged under authority of OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and approved by Ordinance #471. "In relation to OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and City Ordinance #471, would a ' customer who purchased, subsequent to the enactment of the ordinance referenced above, an existing residence that was located in the water service area acquired from Rogers County Rural Water District #3, be eligible for in -city water rates, ' even if the previous owner had received such in -city rates and even though the contract for the sale of the property indicated a transfer of all rights, title, and interest ?" In order to assist you in understanding the issue at question, I have attached correspondence from Mr Mike Turnbaugh, a customer of the Owasso Public Works Authority. It is my intent to solicit from you an opinion that responds to the above question and further addresses any issues you believe relative to the subject. A discussion of this issue is planned for the Council meeting of October 3, 1995. Therefore, your response to this question prior to that meeting would be helpful. Absent a response in that time frame, Council discussion of the issue will be postponed to the October 17 City Council meeting. Sinc ly Rodney J Ray ' City Manager copy: Mayor t City Council Mike Turnbaugh Ronald D Cates City Attorney Suite 680, Parkcentre ' 525 S Main Tulsa, Ok 74103 City of Owasso (918) 272 -2251 FAX (918) 272 -4999 RE: REQUEST FOR OPINION RELATING TO WATER RATES ESTABLISHED BY ' OPWA RESOLUTION #93 -05 AND APPROVED BY ORDINANCE #471 Dear Mr Cates: Please consider this correspondence as an official request for a City Attorney's opinion relating to water rates charged by the Owasso Public Works Authority. Specifically, the question below ' refers to rates charged under authority of OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and approved by Ordinance #471. "In relation to OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and City Ordinance #471, would a ' customer who purchased, subsequent to the enactment of the ordinance referenced above, an existing residence that was located in the water service area acquired from Rogers County Rural Water District #3, be eligible for in -city water rates, ' even if the previous owner had received such in -city rates and even though the contract for the sale of the property indicated a transfer of all rights, title, and interest ?" In order to assist you in understanding the issue at question, I have attached correspondence from Mr Mike Turnbaugh, a customer of the Owasso Public Works Authority. It is my intent to solicit from you an opinion that responds to the above question and further addresses any issues you believe relative to the subject. A discussion of this issue is planned for the Council meeting of October 3, 1995. Therefore, your response to this question prior to that meeting would be helpful. Absent a response in that time frame, Council discussion of the issue will be postponed to the October 17 City Council meeting. Sinc ly Rodney J Ray ' City Manager copy: Mayor t City Council Mike Turnbaugh 0 RONALD D. CATES Attorney at Law Suite 680, ParkCentre 525 South Main Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103 918 -582 -7447 September 28, 1995 Mr. Rodney J. Ray City Manager City of Owasso P.O. Box 180 Owasso, Oklahoma 74055 VIA FACSIMILE, ORIGINAL MAIL FAX 918 -582 -0166 Re: Request for Opinion Relating to Water Rates Established by OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and Approved by Ordinance 4471 -- City Attorney Opinion 95 -03 Dear Mr. Ray: This will acknowledge receipt by me of your correspondence wherein you make an official request for a City Attorney's Opinion relating to water rates charged by the Owasso Public Works Authority. Specifically, the question posed is as follows, to -wit: In relation to OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and City Ordinance #471, would a customer who purchased, subsequent to the enactment of the Ordinance referenced above, an existing residence that was located in the water service area acquired from Rogers County Rural Water District #3, be eligible for in -City water rates, even if the previous owner had received such in -City rates and even though the contract for the sale of the property indicated a transfer of all rights, title, and interest?" Reference to OPWA Resolution #93 -05 as approved by Ordinance #471 reveals an adoption ' of a rate structure for water service in the then newly acquired Rogers County Rural Water District No. 3 territory, to -wit: All new Rogers Water District #3 customers, acquired November 1, are to be ' adopted to our existing city rate as follows: First 1,000 gallons $7.07 (minimum charge); and, ' Each additional 1,000 gallons $2.69. , 2780- 288.owa/ao3 I 1 Mr. Rodney J. Ray September 28, 1995 OP Page Two (2) sp- All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, as of November 1, 1993, are to be changed to the following: First 1,000 gallons $11.47 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1,000 gallons $4.61. A review of such language makes readily apparent the fact that the word "customers" is the operative word a definition to such being dispositive of your inquiry. In interpreting the word customers as employed in OPWA Resolution #93 -05 as approved by Ordinance #471, certain rules a of interpretation must be followed. In that respect, where the language of a statute, ordinance or resolution is plain and unambiguous and its meaning clear, the enactment will be accorded the meaning as expressed by the language therein employed. Oklahoma Journal Publishing Company vs. City of Oklahoma City, Okl. App., 620 P.2d 452 (1980). Further, statutes, ordinances and resolutions are to be construed by reading their provisions with the ordinary and common definitions of the words used unless context dictates special or technical definition is to be utilized. State, ex rel. Western State Hospital v. Stoner, Okl., 614 P.2d 59 (1980). A review of the language employed by OPWA Resolution #93 -05, as approved by Ordinance #471, indicates an absence of any special or technical definition being given to the word "customers" in the context of such Resolution. Accordingly, under the foregoing principals, the common definition of such word must be used. In that regard, "customers ", in the singular, has been defined as one (emphasis our own) who regularly ' or repeatedly makes purchases of, or has business dealings with a tradesman or business house. Aiken Mills v. United States, D.C.S.C., 53 F.Supp. 524, 526; Arkwri hg t Corporation v. United States, D.C.M. Ass., 53 F.Supp. 359, 361. Ordinarily, one (emphasis our own) who has had repeated business dealings with another. Lyons v. Otter Tale Power Company, 70 N.D. 681, 297 N.W. 691, 693; Gallopin v. Continental Casualty Company, 290 Ill. App. 8, 7 N.E. 2d 771, 774. A buyer, purchaser or ap tron (emphasis our own). Nichols v Ocean Accident and Guarantee Corporation ' 70 Ga. App. 169, 27 S.E. 2d 764, 766. See also the Random House College Dictionary based upon the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged Edition, which provides as a definition for customers, in the singular, a patron, buyer, or shopper, a person one has to deal with. I2780- 288.owa/ao3 Mr. Rodney J. Ray ' September 28, 1995 Page Three (3 ) Based upon the foregoing, I am of the opinion that the word "customers" as employed in OPWA Resolution #93 -05, as approved by Ordinance #471, intended persons as opposed to places, i.e. residences. Accordingly, it is my opinion that a person who was a customer of the Rogers County Rural Water District #3 on or before November 1, 1993, would receive the in -City rates as provided for by such Resolution. Likewise, I am of the opinion that a person, or persons, not customers of Rogers County Rural Water District #3 on or before November 1, 1993, would not be eligible for the in -City water rates under the language employed by the Resolution. From the language employed in the OPWA Resolution #93 -05, as approved by Ordinance #471, I am of the opinion that the conclusion hereto reached would be the same notwithstanding the fact that the previous owner had received such in -City rates and in the previous owners sale of the property indicated therewith a transfer of all rights, title, and interest. A transfer of all rights, title and interest normally employed in the conveyance of real estate transfers only all rights, title and interest in and to the real estate being conveyed. From the language employed in OPWA Resolution #93 -05, as approved by Ordinance #471, the right the previous owner possessed was as a third party beneficiary of the contract between the Owasso Public Works Authority and Rogers County Rural Water District #3, such being a personal right possessed by such customer and not transferable by deed of conveyance to realty. I trust the foregoing meets with your needs at this time�ho Id you have any questions or comments concerning the same, please do no hesitate to cont cct Ronald D. Cates City Attorney xc: Mayor Charles L. Burris Vice Mayor Danny Ewing Counselor, Mary Lou Barnhouse Counselor, Mike Helm ' Counselor, Joe Ramey Marcia Boutwell, City Clerk A 2780 -288. owa/ao3 OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY OWASSO, OKLAHOMA RESOLUTION NUMBER 93 -05 A RESOLUTION OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY ESTABLISHING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY, THAT: Section One: The rate schedule set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby adopted. Section Two: The aforementioned rates as well as rate applications shall be effective for November, 1993, usage as reflected by December, 1993, billing. PASSED AND APPROVED this __"day of November, 1993. OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY By Bob Rand 1ph, Chairman ATTEST: Sherry B' hop4 Secretlary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ronald D. Cates, Authority Attorney opwa -r.wsr EXHIBIT "A" All new Rogers Water District #3 customers, acquired November 1, are to be adopted to our existing city rate as follows: First 1,000 gallons $7.07 (minimum charge); and, East additional 1,000 gallons $2,69. All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, as of November 1, 1993, are to be changed to the following: First 1,000 gallons $11.47 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1,000 gallons $4.61 opwa -r.wsr M r6 tom' to 0 TULSA COUNTY CLERK JOAN HASTINGS RCPT 8549 01/05/94 14:01:23 DOC # 94001648 FEE 0.00 PGS 4 8/P 5581/1543 -1546 CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA ORDINANCE NUMBER 4-If AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, APPROVING THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY RATES FOR WATER SERVICE, AS WELL AS THE APPLICATION OF SUCH RATES TO PERSONS WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, THAT: Section One: The rates for water service of the Owasso Public Works Authority, and the application thereof, all as is evidenced by reference to Resolution Number. 93 -05 of the Owasso Public Works Authority, dated the /(,6A day of November, 1993, be and same hereby is approved. Section Two: That due to the imminent need for rate adjustment in the water service rates, an emergency is hereby declared to exist whereby this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon it's passage. APPROVED this /JJ day of November, 1993, with the emergency clause voted upon separately. .... Sherry BiViop, City Cle k APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ronald D. Cates, City Attorney CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA By: ob Randolph, Aayor 1 D1kTj M' 1 TO: CHAIRWOMAN AND TRUSTEES OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FROM: RODNEY J. RAY SUBJECT: PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA FROM ROGERS RURAL WATER DISTRICT ##3 DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 1993 BACKGROUND: Over two years ago City staff members and Rogers County Rural Water District staff initiated discussions relating to a long -term philosophy regarding the future relationship between the two organizations. At that time it was reported to the Council that a viable option for addressing the long -term relationship would be for the City and District to agree to a concept that would allow the City to acquire certain portions of the District as the City's growth moved into the District's service area. Additionally, it was reported that our staff team believed that eventually the City could serve water to the entire area west of the Verdigris River. It was believed that such a relationship would best serve the interest of the citizens and customers of both the City and the Water District. It was recognized that the first phase of such acquisition would, most likely, be in the area immediately north of the Owasso High School and east of 129th East Avenue. That area includes approximately one and one -half sections that is primarily undeveloped, and would be a logical acquisition because of its proximity to the existing City boundary. Subsequent to those discussions the majority of the section around the school was annexed by the City Council upon request from the property's owners. After annexed pieces of the area began to sell and development of those parcels was begun, each time a tract began to develop the developer and City of Owasso would petition the Water District to remove that tract from the District's service area so water could be supplied by the City along with other municipal services. Initially, the District was understanding and did, in fact, detach two areas so the City could provide service. At that time, however, there were concerns that the City seemed to want to "piece- meal" the undeveloped portions of that area into our service area leaving the District to serve their existing customers. That concern was heightened when the City later requested that additional property be released from the District for development within the City. At that PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA FEBRUARY 12, 1993 PAGE TWO I point the District's Board adopted a policy that prohibited the release of any other tracts until ' the City of Owasso would agree to take the entire one and one -half sections east of 129th E. Avenue north of 86th Street and west of 145th East Avenue. ' The District took that position, because it believed that to allow the City to have all of the area that would produce future revenue, while being forced to maintain the existing customers of that area, was a poor business decision. They did not want the responsibility of having to maintain their own lines along side City lines and have the maintenance cost associated with the upkeep of what would eventually become a kind of "no -mans area". That feeling resulted in the District telling our staff that they felt an agreement should be finalized for the City to take over the ' entire area and include the purchase of their existing lines as a part of the "deal" criteria. After reviewing the District's proposal the City staff review team was of the opinion that the ' proposal for taking over water service for that area was premature and would result in a large capital liability for the City. Although the District's lines in the area under discussion are in good condition, it was the staff position that development in the area was not occurring, that ' land prices were too high to promote the sale and development of the area, and that absent development the City would be forced to do substantial capital investment to maintain service ' to the existing 66 customers. It was also the staff opinion that the existing customers would not provide enough revenue to offset the capital, operating and maintenance cost. Based on that evaluation the staff was not receptive to accepting a deal for a buy -out at that point. Subsequent to that opinion, several things happened that forced the staff to rethink its position. First, all of the undeveloped land in the section around the high school has sold to parties interested in development. Fox land to Windsor Lake Developer, Synar land to Terrill Taylor- , Brentwood and Trayband property to Charlie Helscel. Second, housing developments will accomplish most of the capital cost needed to continue service to the existing customers. Lastly, ' the recent creation of an Enterprise Fund could certainly use the revenue generated by an additional thousand water taps during the next five to ten years. In reviewing the land available for development in the areas under discussion, it is the staff opinion that a conservative figure of 1600 new water customers could be used to calculate revenue /expense figures for analyzing this proposal. That number of customers will eventually generate $96,000 per year in contribution to the Enterprise Fund Capital Program alone. Additionally, that number of water customers will increase the OPWA bottom line by approximately 20% over our current level. When considering that capital costs are minimal (less ' than $5,000 to hook up to system) the financial impact of acquiring the area is significant. It is also anticipated that the acquisition fee of $49,750 can be recouped by adding a fifty dollar ($50) extra charge on the tap fee for all water taps in that area. Based on our data it is expected that the acquisition cost would be recouped in the following manner: PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA FEBRUARY 12, 1993 PAGE TREE 1993 -94 $ 6,000 (120 lots) 1994 -95 5,000 (100 lots) 1995 -96 15,000 (300 lots) 1996 -97 17,500 (350 lots) 1997 -98 15,000 (300 lots) 1998 -99 11,500 (230 lots) 1999 -2000 10.000 200 lots Total surcharge $ 80,000 1,600 lots Thus a $50 per tap extra charge assessed to that one and one -half section will, over a seven year period produce enough revenue to pay the $49,750 acquisition cost plus add an additional $30,250 to the OPWA to offset any maintenance cost on the existing system as its mains are replaced by development. ACOUISITION COST: The proposal from the District requests payment (lump sum) of $49,750. That payment is in consideration for acquiring the following areas and lines. SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 21N RANGE 14E 1. 100 acres with 1400 feet of 2" P vc ' 2. 40 acres with 1500 feet of 4" pvc (Pleasant View) ' 3. 180 acres with undeveloped land SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 21 N RANGE 14E PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA FEBRUARY 12, 1993 PAGE FOUR 1. 160 acres with 4,600 feet of 3" pvc 900 feet of 4" pvc 1,700 feet of 2" pvc 1,500 feet of 1 1/2" pvc 2. 60 acres with 5,600 feet of 4" pvc 3. 420 acres of undeveloped land Total acres developed - 360 Total number of customers now - 66 Total feet of 4" pvc - 8,000 Total feet of 3" pvc - 4,600 Total feet of 2" pvc - 3,100 Total feet of 1 1/2" pvc - 1,500 Total acres undeveloped - 600 Total projected taps when fully developed - 1,600 PROPOSED CONTRACT: The contract proposed by the District contains the following items: 1. Lump sum payment of $49,750 upon presentation of mortgage free deed 2. Transfer of ownership of all existing lines and easements to OPWA and engineering plans for all lines PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA , FEBRUARY 12, 1993 PAGE FIVE ' 24 3. Six months for City to assume service to existing customers of the District 4. Agreement to charge only in -City water rates to 66 existing District customers 5. Detachment of all of Section 21 and Section 16 from Rural Water District service area with lien releases from F. H. A. COMMENTS: 1. The acquisition of this area will create a positive revenue source for the OPWA. The area is already developing and the only reason for the lack of additional development is the lack of desire to develop while this issue is unresolved. 2. Even though we can work out a deal with the District for them to provide water while the City provides sewer, refuse and other services, it is logical to have only one provider for all services. 3. Under the staff proposal, all acquisition costs would be returned to the City as taps were requested, thus no current citizen would be paying for the acquisition, additionally the extra tap fee would produce funds for any maintenance and operation needs of the existing system. 4. The existing lines serving the 66 customers will not provide adequate fire protection. While there is no law or requirement for that protection the Trustees should note that fire fighting capacity in the currently developed areas of section 16 and 21 will be limited until housing developmentS replaces all of the main lines. Even then the lines within the County subdivisions would not be replaced and would not support fire fighting equipment. 5. Mr. Cates has reviewed and commented on the proposed contract. All changes requested I were approved by the District's Board. 6. While I do understand the natural reluctance of the Trustees to pay for what we consider sub- standard lines and then assume responsibility for those lines, I strongly believe that the City is the logical provider of services to that area and should move to acquire the rights to service the property with a municipal water service. . PROPOSED PURCHASE OF SERVICE AREA FEBRUARY 12, 1993 ' PAGE SIX F RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Trustee approval of the attached agreement and authorization for the Chairwoman to execute the necessary documents, and approval of an expenditure of $49,750 to the Rogers Rural Water District #3 as compensation for the service area. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed contract 2. Map showing area under discussion 1 1 1 1 I VIA ,m � I I MEMoxnxnuM TO: THE CHAIRPERSON AND TRUSTEES OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FROM: RODNEY J. RAY SUBJECT: AGREEMENT BETWEEN OPWA AND ROGERS COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR ACQUISITION OF ONE AND ONE- ' HALF SECTIONS OF RRWD SERVICE AREA DATE: FEBRUARY 25, 1993 ' BACKGROUND: During the February 16, 1993 meeting of the OPWA, the staff presented a proposed agreement rthat would provide for the transfer of approximately one and one -half sections of land from the Rogers County Rural Water District service area to the OPWA (City) service area. During a discussion of the issues, it became apparent that there were some very basic concerns relating to the proposal. The Trustees did not take action on the proposed agreement, other than to table the matter and refer it back to staff for additional development. r For the past two weeks, I have worked to develop a plan of action that would address the concerns expressed by the Trustees and allow the acquisition to proceed. At the time of this writing, a final proposal has not been fully developed and accepted by the other parties involved in the matter. There has, however, been a significant amount of discussion and there is a framework in place that provides a basis for continuing the process. The staff continues to strongly support the acquisition of the service area as a sound business investment that will ■ produce increased revenues as the area is developed. At this point, I am working from the concept that a long -term equalization of the "rural" water rates, using a phased -in process of reducing those rates, would be acceptable to the Council. The basis for this part of the concept lies in a "revenue neutral" proposal that would call for the reduction of rates for the City's "outside" customers by the exact amount of revenue produced by the new customers gained from the Water District. Under this plan the Trustees would agree to rate protection for the new customers and would make a long -term commitment to existing rural customers for continued rate reductions based on added customers from the acquired service area. Initially, the staff's calculations indicate that the rate reduction for those customers would be between $3.50 and $5.00 per month (that range is based on average usage and could be slightly impacted by actual usage after a one -year history is acquired). Staff discussions with C ROGERS COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT ACQUISITION FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE TWO some of the parties involved indicate that this portion of the concept is being well received, in fact, the basic concept was initially suggested by a Trustee. The second part of the concept revolves around the payment of $49,750 to the District for the service area. There is obvious concern relating to the requirement of an up -front payment. As you may recall during the discussion, one developer mentioned that his development company would be willing to advance fund a portion of the lump sum payment. I have held discussions with the principles of that firm, and, as of this point, do not have a firm proposal to make regarding their level of commitment. Discussions have ranged form a 50 -50 (50% developer and 50% City) advance funding to a 100% developer - funded plan. There are serious doubts that we can achieve a 100 % advance - funding by the developer unless there is some method of them to be compensated for the cost of the money used to fund the buy -out. While that is a viable possibility, it has not been discussed with the Trustees. Additionally, the developers are not comfortable with advancing funds for the buy -out without a clearly defined time limit on the repayment of those funds. Generally, a time period of three years has been suggested as a reasonable time for the City to pay back the advance funding. The staff estimates that a $100 increase in tap fees would produce approximately $ during the first three years (based on existing development projects encompassing an estimated 178 lots in Windsor I, Windsor H, Brentwood and a 50 acre unnamed addition in the planning stage). Central to resolving this issue are three questions that only the Trustees can answer. First, is the issue of whether or not the Trustees are receptive to advance funding a portion of the initial $49,750 acquisition cost, and if so, how much of that cost are the Trustees willing to advance? ' Second, are the Trustees willing to provide some repayment of the cost of the money the developer would advance? If this is acceptable, how much of that cost would the Trust be willing to make available? Thirdly, what time frame for repayment of an advance funding is acceptable to the Trustees? The staff is of the opinion that a consensus can be reached on all of the basic points of this agreement and a recommendation will be presented to the Trustees at the meeting. I believe that the recommendation will include the "revenue neutral "/rate reduction proposal, an increase in tap fees for the acquired area, an advance funding of the purchase price by the developer, with a payback of that advance funding over a three year period and with some additional payback to cover the cost of the advance funding. However, an option to that recommendation could include only a partial advance funding of the purchase price by the developer with no consideration of re- payment of the cost of the money. That option would, however, include a recommendation that the Trustees invest funds for about half of the purchase price. Such cost would be recovered from additional tap fees in the area under discussion. ROGERS COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT ACQUISITION FEBRUARY 25, 1993 PAGE THREE I have attached the proposed contract between the OPWA and the District for your review. I view this issue as being critical to the future of Owasso and want you to know that I am available at your convenience to discuss the matter with you. If you have questions, please call Mr. Compton, Mr. Augustine, Ms. Bishop or me. RECOIVEMENDATION: A recommendation will be made at the meeting. ATTACHMENT: 1. Proposed agreement 2. Memorandum dated February 12, 1993 MEMORANDUM TO: THE CHAIRMAN AND TRUSTEES OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FROM: RODNEY J RAY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REPORT FOR ESTABLISHMENT CUSTOMERS AND NEW S ACQUIRED FROM ROGERS COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT #3 DATE: November 11, 1993 BACKGROUND: On March 2, 1993, Trustees of the OPWA approved a concept for the purchase of one and one - from the Rogers County Rural Water District #3. On half sections of "protected service area" OPWA entered into a contract with the district, thereby formalizing the , that same date, the concept agreements negotiated between the parties. The concept agreement and subsequent contract contained language that allowed those customers rates that were to be no greater ' within the service area being purchased by the City to pay water the rates by customers residing within the corporate limits of the city. Additionally, than paid the concept approved by the Trustees outlined a "phased in" approach to equalizing water rates. rural rates (rural ' The Council recognized that the inequity between the in -city rates and 75 % for water than in -city customers) should be addressed and an effort customers pay more t requires that tthn made to reduce the difference between those rates. The equalization con epd o f staff annually evaluate and analyze the revenue produced by the one added to the Authority's profit, the acquired from the district. As revenue from that area difference between the "rural rate" and "in -city" rate was to be decreased by that same amount. ' Therefore, the rate reduction would not adversely impact the OPWA's bottom line. Resolution #93 -05, if approved, will provide the proper legal authority for rates contemplated that those customers formerly served through previous Trustee action. The resolution provides district be charged at the "in-city" they do not reside within by the rural water customers by an the corporate limits. The resolution also reduces � rates for all is derived from a one dollar average of $1.40 per month ($16.80 per year) . That reduction decrease in the base rate and a nine cent per thousand gallons decrease in the usage rate. Please the rate reduction is based directly upon the operating net revenue produced by the new note that customers from the rural water district. L ' RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Trustee approval of Resolution $93 -05. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution #93 -05 ' 2. Contract between OPWA and Rogers Rural Water District #3 11 1 MEMORANDUM ' Water Rates November 11, 1993 Page 2 ' RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Trustee approval of Resolution $93 -05. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution #93 -05 ' 2. Contract between OPWA and Rogers Rural Water District #3 11 1 OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY OWASSO, OKLAHOMA RESOLUTION NUMBER A RESOLUTION OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY ESTABLISHING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY, THAT: Section One: The rate schedule set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby adopted. Section .Two: The aforementioned rates as well as rate applications shall be effective for November, 1993, usage as reflected by December, 1993, billing. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of November, 1993. OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY By: Bob Randolph, Chairman ATTEST: Sherry Bishop, Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ronald D. Cates, Authority Attorney opwa -r.wsr �l EXHIBIT "A" All new Rogers Water District #3 customers, acquired November 1, are to be adopted to our existing city rate as follows: First 1,000 gallons $7.07 (minimum charge); and, East additional 1,000 gallons $2.69. All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, as of November 1, 1993, are to be changed to the following: First 1,000 gallons $11.47 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1,000 gallons $4.61 I� 1P opwa -r.wsr CONTRACT �itcit THIS CONTRACT made and entered into this 2„J day of -P�, 1993, by and between RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT', and THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY, a Public Trust, of Owasso; Oklahoma, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "AUTHORITY ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, District is a duly incorporated Rural Water District, and whereas, Authority is a duly authorized Public Trust, both created under the authority of the Statutes of the State of Oklahoma; and, WHEREAS, District is operating a Rural Water District in Rogers County, Oklahoma, and Authority is distributing water in an area partially located in Rogers County, Oklahoma; and, WHEREAS, it has been deemed by both the Boards of District and Authority to be in the best interest of all parties concerned, that District deannex a portion of its area now being served, based upon its inability to properly provide service to its customers, and to sell and transfer that portion of its system to Authority, said legal description of the area to be deannexed and transferred, and the property and equipment to be transferred, all as described and set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein and made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, Authority is equally desirous of purchasing same, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises and agreements, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. District will cause the property described on Exhibit "A" to be deannexed from Rural Water District No. 3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, by the proper statutory procedures. Said deannexation to be completed prior to 180 days from the date this contract is signed by all parties. The Parties agree to agree on a date of closing within 180 days from the date this agreement is signed by all parties or any extension is made in writing signed by both parties. In the event deannexation is delayed, and the closing provided is not accomplished within said 180 days from the date this contract is signed by all parties, or unless the time is extended by all parties, then this Contract shall be void. 2. District will convey all of their right, title and interest in and to their presently owned rights of way and easements, and all lines, meters and equipment, as described in Exhibit "A ", and include any equipment now in place or to be in place on the date of closing, or to such time as the closing may be extended as provided in Paragraph 1 above, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 3. District will provide Authority with such maps, plats and engineering drawings that they may now have in their possession, and reasonable personal assistance to Authority in the location of said meters, lines, easements, rights of way, and equipment. 4. Both District and Authority agree the transfer will take place at 8:00 a.m. on a closing date to be agreed upon within said 180 day period or any extension thereof. Until said time, District shall be responsible for the furnishing of service to its customers and shall be liable for any such operation and shall be entitled to accumulated billings until 8:00 a.m. on the date of closing. District agrees to provide a final reading on or before that time and a final billing rendered to customers. It is specifically agreed that if payment of the final billing, as prepared and billed by District, comes into the hands of Authority, Authority will forthwith account and pay over to District any such sums acquired by them. The closing date as herein set forth may be extended in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 1 above. 5. District agrees to make proper conveyance to Authority by assignment of its easements and rights of way and by proper Bill of Sale in and to all personal property and equipment, all as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. District makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the title to the real property, rights of way, easements to be conveyed by them to Authority, except that it has the right to assign such rights of way and easements and it will warrant title to the personal property, lines, meters and equipment as described on Exhibit "A'. Authority will have a reasonable time to inspect and test such equipment and lines, but District makes no warranty, express or implied, of the condition of the lines, meters and equipment. 6. District states and represents that the property conveyed is subject to a lien and that they will obtain a release of said lien from the Farmers Home Administration, satisfactory to Authority of the area to be deannexed and the property to be sold and conveyed to Authority under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 7. Authority agrees to provide water service to the present customers in the deannexed area at the same rate as that charged to water customers within the limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma. Authority agrees to accept Benefit Units from District members in lieu of a water meter deposit and to reassign said benefit units to District for cancellation. 8. Persons seeking water service who are not being served at the time of closing shall be permitted service connection at the discretion of Authority subject to ordinary and ' customary fees as may be applicable. 9. District agrees to furnish Authority at time of closing a list with current addresses of its customers. 10. Authority agrees to pay District at time of closing the total purchase price for 1P the property described in Exhibit "A ", of Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($49,750.00) said purchase price to be paid in cash, subject to the following: (a) Delivery at time of closing of all necessary recordable documents executed `,,, by the District in favor of the Authority to convey all items referred to in Paragraph above. I(b) List of customers as provided in Paragraph 9 above. s (c) Release of lien on behalf of the Farmers Home Administration. (d) Provide the Authority with UCC search in Rogers and Oklahoma County and certification from the Secretary of State, all evidencing there are no liens or encumbrances filed against the subject property other that the Farmers Home Administration Mortgage. 11. Authority will assume all right, title and interest in said property conveyed and shall assume the duty to maintain and operate said system from 8:00 a.m. of date of closing and shall assume liability for the operation of said system as shall occur from that time and date. District acknowledges that it shall be liable for any claims or occurrences attributable to its operation of the system up to the time and date of closing and each party hereto agrees to hold the other party harmless from any liability, attorney's fees and expenses of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to any liability assumed herein. 12. The cost and performance of this Contract shall be as follows: Each party shall pay their respective attorney fees. Authority shall pay recording fees of the documents acquired from District No. 3, and any and all expenses incurred in obtaining financing for the purchase of any property. District No. 3 shall pay expense of deannexation and any expense incurred relative to The Farmers Home Administration loan. District No. 3 shall pay their expenses of material and labor to disconnect from the District lines within the deannexed area. Authority shall furnish such necessary material and labor to connect the deannexed area to its system. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto have affixed their hands and seals of the signature to be attested by an appropriate officer of each party, the day and year first above written. RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 3 Rogers County, Oklahoma ATTEST: By: Chairman Secretary ATT -EST: THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY hairman I u 1 1 EXHIBIT "A" y. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF AREA BEING DEANNEXED: THE N 1/2, AND THE 31 1/4, AND THE N 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4, ALL IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 2�. NORTH, RANGE 14 EAST, TULSA COUNTY. I AND AND THE SOUTH 1/2 LESS AND EXCEPT THE EAST 50 FEET OF THE SE 1/4, Al '. IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 14 EAST, TULSA COUNTY. 13 .�- SEVENTY -SIX (76) METERS AND NORMAL APPURTENANCES. '� ALL WATER LINES, VALVES AND APPURTENANCES OWNED BY RURAL WATER 1. }7i TRICT #3 IN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED AREA. LESS AND EXCEPT THE (4 ") 'VC WATER LINE LOCATED IN THE EAST 50' OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 16, 'C''NSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 14 EAST, TULSA COUNTY. ). AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE AREA DEPICTING THE METER LOCATIONS. ALL ROW AND EASEMENTS LOCATED IN ABOVE DESCRIBED AREA. I MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND TRUSTEES OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY FROM: RODNEY J RAY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REQUEST BY UTILITY CUSTOMER TO EQUALIZE WATER RATE IN PLEASANT VIEW SUBDIVISION BY REDUCING ALL RATES TO THE "IN- CITY" RATES IDATE: September 29, 1995 BACKGROUND: At the September 19, 1995 OPWA meeting, Mr Bill Witt, a resident of the Pleasant View subdivision and a customer of the Authority, addressed the Trustees with a concern relating to water rates. Mr Witt's concern centered on the fact that there are two rates for persons living within the water service area acquired by the city from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County; one rate for the district's original customers and another higher rural rate for new customers in the same area. As you may recall from the September 19th meeting and from previous Trustee action, persons who were customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County were allowed in -city water rates as a part of the acquisition agreement between the City and the District. All new customers (defined as any person not having been a customer prior to November 1, 1993) are ' charged a rural rate (67.74 % higher than the in -city rates). The charges are based on OPWA Resolution #93 -05 (dated November 16, 1993 and attached), and City Ordinance #471 (also dated November 16, 1993 and attached). The staff has no option other than to charge the specified rates. A staff review of the initial request by Mr Witt determined that the authority to equalize the rate structure was allowed only by a change in the resolution that established such rates. Mr Witt has indicated that he feels the existing rate structure is unfair and that all of the Pleasant View residents should have the same water rates. In an effort to initiate such a decision, Mr t Witt has officially requested Trustee /Council action to equalize water rates for all Pleasant View customers (see attached correspondence dated 9/25/95). 1 REQUEST TO EQUALIZE WATER RATES September 29, 1995 Page 2 THE REQUEST: The request under consideration is for action to "equalize the water rates for all Pleasant View Estates residents ". In order for the Trustees to take action to agree to the request, OPWA resolution #93 -05 would have to be modified and the City Council would then have to approve such change by amending Ordinance #471. Therefore, the staff has prepared an enabling resolution (OPWA Resolution #95 -07) for your consideration, and in response to the request by Mr Witt. The resolution is attached for your review. CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION: Subsequent to receiving Mr Witt's request, the City Attorney was asked to render an opinion as to the legality of equalizing rates for persons living within a specific geographic boundary, without similar action affecting all rural customers. Mr Cates has issued City Attorney Opinion #95 -04 dated September 28, 1995, wherein he opinions that Mr Witt's request would lack compliance with constitutional requirements for "equal protection ". Apparently the rates for all rural customers may be equalized, and it is also acceptable to have differing rates for those customers who were Rural Water District customers prior to November 1, 1993. However, according to the opinion, the City may not equalize rates within one specific area without exposure to legal action that would force equalization of all rural rates. The City Attorney's opinion is attached for your review. AVAILABLE OPTIONS: Based on a staff review of the request, the financial condition of the OPWA Fund, and City Attorney's Opinion #95 -04, the following options are available for Trustee consideration: OPTION ONE - Adopt Resolution #95 -07. Such action would serve to allow any resident of Pleasant View Estates subdivision to pay "in- city" water rates regardless of whether the customer had been a Rural Water District customer prior to November 1, 1993. The initial financial impact of such an action is minimal. Existing revenue will be decreased by approximately $484.14 per year. The long term impact, however, will probably be to produce a constitutional challenge of the action that would likely require the Trustees to reduce all rural rates for the other 257 rural customers to the "in- city" rate. The financial impact of that action would result in a decrease in annual revenue of approximately $59,000. OPTION TWO - Change all rural rates to the "in- city" rates. Such action would recognize the principles of "equal protection" as defined in City Attorney Opinion #95 -04 and would avoid what the staff believes to be a certain legal challenge to our rate structure if Option #1 were a I REQUEST TO EQUALIZE WATER RATES September 29, 1995 Page 3 selected. The immediate financial impact would be to reduce annual revenues by an estimated $59,000. OPTION THREE - Take no action and leave rates as currently established by OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and #95 -06. Such a decision would serve to preserve the original concept of acquiring the water service area from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, and will allow for the continued "phased -in" equalization of all municipal rates (this year the percent of difference between rural rates and in -city rates was decreased from 71.3 % to 67.7 %, a reduction of 3.6% in that difference). There is no financial impact to the Authority, however, the four families in the Pleasant View subdivision will continue to pay 67.7 % more for water than they would under the in -city rate. COMMENTS: 1. OPWA Resolution #93 -05 and Ordinance #471 are very specific and intended to require all ' new customers in the area acquired from RRWD to pay the rural rates established by the Trustees and City Council. I 2. To have different water rates for neighbors in the same subdivision is not a good situation and will always foster complaints of inequity and unfairness. 3. To allow only new customers in Pleasant View a protection from rural rates will undoubtedly result in a tremendous outcry from the 277 existing rural customers. Protests of unfairness will be assured. 4. To reduce all rural rates to "in-city" rates at one time will lace a difficult fiscal burden on Y P the OPWA Fund at a time when the staff objective is to try to replace a $50,000 subsidy from the OPWA to the city in 94 -95 to help the city offset a revenue shortfall. Additionally, the OPWA Fund anticipates a major capital acquisition (refuse truck - $115,000) out of operating revenues this year. CONCLUSION - RECOMMENDATION: The staff conclusion is that the Pleasant View situation is not desirable, but the alternatives are even more undesirable and will have a significant financial impact on the city. Additionally, the staff review of City Attorney Opinion #95 -04 leads to the conclusion that the Trustees may equalize rates in a limited geographical area. Such action would be contrary to law and subject ' to certain challenge by the remaining rural customers of the Authority. REQUEST TO EQUALIZE WATER RATES September 29, 1995 Page 4 Therefore, the recommendation of the staff is for the Trustees to reaffirm its commitment to the existing rate structure and a phased -in equalization of rates by taking no action and leaving the existing policy in place. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Correspondence from Mr Bill Witt dated September 25, 1995 2. Resolution #95 -07 (proposed) 3. Correspondence to Mr Cates dated September 21, 1995 4. City Attorney Opinion #95 -04 dated September 28, 1995 5. OPWA Resolution #93 -05 dated November 11, 1993. Note - A copy of this document has been sent to Mr Witt for his review and information. 1 1 i �1 1 �(t% /veS r C? �J /G Y /�11c -� /� 7 p J%d7h�� G�/JLL 1 f��jLi�r /-vr reL-jle , /4c o44K�- 1 WC �lLf ✓ G i 4 rLv , 16)e :5- A �r�CG� 1 1 i i 1 1 OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY OPWA RESOLUTION NO 95 -07 +3 f ehl A RESOLUTION OF THE TRUSTEES OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY AMENDING RESOLUTION #93 -05 ESTABLISHING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY THAT: ' SECTION ONE: Exhibit "A ", adopted in SECTION ONE of OPWA Resolution #93 -05 is repealed. SECTION TWO: The rate schedule set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby adopted. SECTION THREE: The aforementioned rates, as well as the applications, shall be effective ' for November 1995 usage as reflected by December 1995 billing. SECTION FOUR: Nothing herein shall have effect on the provisions or intent of OPWA ' Resolution #95 -06 wherein water rates were established and sections of Aye OPWA Resolutions #92 -04 and #93 -05 were adopted by reference. APP V AD PTED this 3rd day of October, 1995 by the Trustees of the Owasso Pub &r4 o Charles L Burris, Chairperson ATTEST: Marcia Boutwell, Trust Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ' Ronald D Cates, Trust Attorney EXHIBIT "A" All new Rogers Water District #3 customers acquired November 1, 1993, are to be adopted to our existing city rate as follows: First 1000 gallons $7.17 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1000 gallons $2.79. ' All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from ' Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3 Rogers County as of November 1, 1993, are to be changed to the following: First 1000 gallons $7.17 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1000 gallons $2.79. i 1 207 South Cedar PO Box 180 Owasso, OK 74055 September 26, 1995 Ronald D Cates City Attorney Suite 680, Parkcentre 525 S Main Tulsa, Ok 74103 City of Owasso (918) 272 -2251 FAX (918) 272 -4999 RE: REQUEST FOR CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION RELATING TO WATER RATES AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF SUCH RATES Dear Mr Cates: Please consider this correspondence as an official request for an opinion from the City Attorney in response to the below question. "May the Authority establish, and the City Council approve, water rates that would allow for customers in a specific geographic location (Pleasant View Subdivision), outside the city limits, to be charged in -city water rates, provided however that all other rural water customers would continue to pay the rural rates ?" In a recent meeting of the Authority, a customer requested that all of the Authority's customers in the Pleasant View subdivision be charged the in -city rates for water purchases. The issue is rescheduled for discussion during the October 3 meeting of the Authority. Your opinion regarding this matter is essential in the Council's decision - making process. Specifically, the ramifications of granting such a request are important to the Council's understanding of the issue. Your expeditious response to this request will be helpful as the Authority and Council review the request. If you have questions, please let me know. City Manager copy: Mayor City Council Bill Witt 1 918 -582 -7447 RONALD D. CATES Attorney at Law Suite 680, ParkCentre 525 South Main Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103 September 28, 1995 FAX 918 -582 -0166 Mr. Rodney J. Ray City Manager ' City of Owasso P.O. Box 180 Owasso, Oklahoma 74055 ' VIA FACSIMILE ORIGINAL MAILED Re: City Attorney Opinion 95 -04 - Water Rates and the Administration of Water Rates ' Dear Mr. Ray: This will acknowledge receipt by me of your correspondence wherein you officially request an opinion from me in my capacity as City Attorney for the City of Owasso, Oklahoma. The question ' posed is as follows, to -wit: ' "May the Authority (Owasso Public Works Authority) establish, and the City Council approve, water rates that would allow for customers in a specific geographic location (Pleasant View Subdivision) outside the city limits, to be charged in -City water rates, provided however that all other rural water customers would continue to pay the rural rates? ". ' Initially, a legal analysis of your inquiry necessitates recognition of the factual circumstances which would result from implementation of such proposed differential rate structure. Essentially, the authority would be taking one (1) classification of water user, such being a water user outside the city ' limits, and dividing such classification into differing classifications one (1) of which receiving the more favorable in -City water rates and the other the less favorable outside city limits water rates. For purposes of this legal analysis, it is assumed that no other distinction exists between the classifications other than one (1) classification is in a specific geographic location and the other classification is not. It is important to note at this juncture for reasons that will hereinafter be made readily apparent, this ' legal analysis excludes from consideration those customers within Pleasant View Subdivision who were customers of the Rogers County Rural Water District #3 on or before November 1, 1993. i I2780- 288.owa/ao4 Mr. Rodney J. Ray ' September 28, 1995 Page Two (2) ' Accordingly, for purposes of this analysis, I am considering one classification to consist of all the water service customers within Pleasant View Subdivision who were not customers of Rogers County Rural Water District #3 on or before November 1, 1993, and the other classification to consist of all other water service customers outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma. Under the law of the State of Oklahoma, the fixing of rates of publicly owned utilities is determined a legislative function and in the absence of a clear showing that the rates are unjust, unreasonable, discriminatory, the Courts may not interfere. Oklahoma City Hotel and Motor Hotel Association_ Inc._ vs the City of Oklahoma City. Oklahoma, 531 P.2d 316 Oki. (1974). Under Oklahoma law, the rule is not that there must not be any discrimination of any kind, but that there must be no unjust discrimination. Fretz v. City of Edmond, 66 Oki. 262, 168 P. 800 (1916). Claims of "unjust discrimination" in cases involving the provision or rates of publicly provided services have been analyzed under the equal protection clause of the Federal Constitution. U.S.CONST. Amend XIV. Orbel Village v. Township of Wayne, 98 N.J. Super. 8, 235 Ap.2d 905 (Ch. Div. 1967), affirmed, 101 N.J. Super. 403, 244 Ap.2d 513 (Ap. Div. 1968) affirmed, 53 N.J. 496, 251 Ap.2d 441 (1969); Oklahoma City Hotel and Motor Hotel Association, Inc., v Oklahoma City, 531 P.2d 316, 321 (Okla. 1974); Kliks v. Dalles Citv, 216 Or. 160, 164, 335 P.2d 366, 368, (1959). Where, as here, no fundamental right or suspect class is involved challenges under the equal protection clause are reviewed by the "rational basis" test. Under what the Courts term the minimum scrutiny of the so called "rational basis" test there will be a determination of unconstitutionality only where the relevant law classifies similar persons for different treatment upon wholly arbitrary and capricious grounds. When a classification rest upon some reasonable consideration of legislative policy, it will not be unconstitutional. If any reasonable policy or purpose for the legislative classification may be conceived of the enactment will be upheld. U.S.CONST. Amend. XIV. Orbel Village v. Township of Wayne, 98 N.J. Super. 8, 235 Ap.2d 905 (Ch. Div. 1967), affirmed, 101 N.J. Super. 403, 244 Ap.2d 513 (Ap. Div. 1968) affirmed, 53 N.J. 496, 251 Ap.2d 441 (1969) (case citations omitted). The Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma has determined that in analyzing public utility rates and classifications under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, the ultimate ' consumer or ultimate use of the water service is a reasonable basis for classification in fixing rates. Oklahoma City Hotel and Motor Hotel Association, Inc., v Oklahoma City. Oklahoma Oki. 531 P.2d 316 (1974). In Oklahoma City Hotel and Motor and Hotel Association Inc V Oklahoma Cif, id., the Oklahoma Supreme Court determined that separate classifications by a public provider of water, under the Ultimate Consumer Test, is reasonable, if there are differences sufficient to justify the separate classifications. However, if virtually no signifiacnt difference exists between the classifications, such will be deemed insufficient to justify separate classification for the differential water rates. 2780- 288.owa/ao4 ' Mr. Rodney J. Ray September 28, 1995 Page Three (3) Based upon the foregoing, I am of the opinion that under the Constitution of the United States as well as the law of the State of Oklahoma, a specific geographical location, without there being any other difference, is insufficient to justify a separate classification by the Owasso Public Works Authority for differing water rates for water customers located outside the city limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma. As noted above, this analysis and the resultant conclusion excludes from consideration those customers in Pleasant View Subdivision who were customers on or before November 1, 1993, as such presents differing factual circumstances outside the scope of the question presented. Likewise, this analysis, and the conclusion reached herein, excludes from its application the issue of classifications and corresponding differential rates being drawn between customers inside the city limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, and customers outside the city limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, as such involves differing factual circumstances and is beyond the scope of the question presented. wo It is therefore my official opinion that the Authority may not establish and the City Council may not approve, water rates that would allow for customers in a specific geographical location (Pleasant View Subdivision), outside the city limits, to be charged in -City water rates, provided however all other rural water customers would continue to pay the existing rural water rates. I trust the foregoing meets with your needznaIdD. d you have any questions or comments concerning same, please do not hesitate City Attorney xc: Mayor Charles L. Burris Vice Mayor Danny Ewing Counselor, Mary Lou Barnhouse Counselor, Mike Helm Counselor, Joe Ramey Marcia Boutwell, City Clerk 2780- 288.owa/ao4 OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY OWASSO, OKLAHOMA RESOLUTION NUMBER 93 -vS A RESOLUTION OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY ESTABLISHING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY, THAT: Section One: The rate schedule set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby adopted. Section Two: The aforementioned rates as well as rate applications shall be effective for November, 1993, usage as reflected by December, 1993, billing. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of November, 1993. OWASSO PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY BY Bob Rand 1ph, hairman ATTEST: Sherry B� hop,-4 Secre ary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ronald D. Cates, Authority Attorney opwa -r.wsr P O. EXHIBIT "A" All new Rogers Water District #3 customers, acquired November 1, are to be adopted to our existing city rate as follows: First 1,000 gallons $7.07 (minimum charge); and, East additional 1,000 gallons $2.69. All rural customer rates, including customers living outside the corporate limits of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, but inside the territory acquired by the Owasso Public Works Authority from Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, Oklahoma, who were not customers of the Rural Water District #3, Rogers County, as of November 1, 1993, are to be changed to the following: First 1,000 gallons $11.47 (minimum charge); and, Each additional 1,000 gallons $4.61 I� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1