Minutes 05/08/1984 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~40 TUESDAY MAY 8, 1984 Conclusions and Recommendations In my mind, at least, we are just about back around to where we were with this deal in mid-November of last year. In the past five months, we (including the Council, our consultants and your staff) have all worked diligently to find a solution or approach that would be largely, if not entirely, satisfactory to both the City and the P.S.A. Unfortu- nately, this has not developed and for a number of reasons, not all of which I may fully understand. However, it seems that the City's best offer to compromise has been rejected and your administrative staff and consultants concur in the following conclusions: 1. We do not agree with recent opinion that diversion, as a general matter, should be viewed fundamentally as a stop-gap solution. The diversion idea was originally sponsored by P.S.A. as one segment of a two-part 20-year scheme for regiona1ization of facilities. This concept should be maintained or the whole idea of diversion sim- ply abandoned once and for all. 2. While flexibility of operation, being touted as justifi- cation for diversion-first, is a theoretical benefit, it should not be viewed as compelling. Most wastewater treat- ment plants in the Commonwealth and the country as a whole operate within established standards and without the benefit of such arrangements. 3. The City's long-range need is for the capacity to treat 7.60 MGD, or 3.60 MGD more than we currently have. To accomplish this, we must preserve the 4.0 MGD we now have, add 2.0 MGD by expanding our plant, and be in a position to divert 1.60 MGD to Koehler. If we deal away any of our current capacity or if the P.S.A. refuses us the ability to divert suffi- ciently in the future, we'll have no choice but to expand our plant beyond 8.0 MGD. 4. In any event, we cannot foresee any combination of economic factors that would make sense of City involvement in any third-plant idea that the County may ultimately choose to pursue. On April 4, I made a three-part recommendation to the Council: to make a final offer as to diversion-first; to give P.S.A. a relatively short time to accept or reject it; and, in the event of rejection, to move without further debate to authorize Wiley & Wilson to prepare plans for expansion of our plant. The Council chose to go only with the first of these ideas, and I didn't quarrel with that. But it didn't work and another month has gone by with no gain on our capacity problems. My recommendation is now simpler: