05. PH- Sewer and Water - Rules Making Authority for Both UtilitiesCITY OF KALISPELL
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE ADOPTION
FOR KALISPELL SEWER UTILITY
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of
Kalispell shall consider a proposed addition to the Rules and
Regulations of the Kalispell Sewer Department at a Public Hearing,
Monday, August 19, 1996, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at
7:00 P.M. The addition to the Rules would take effect after
September 1, 1996.
If adopted, Rule V of the Sewer Department Regulations shall
be amended by adding the following:
(5) Annexation Required for Initiation or Continuation
of Sewer Service
Any customer now receiving, or hereafter
initiating, sewer service supplied by the
Kalispell Sewer Department, shall be deemed to
have consented to, and waived the right to
protest, annexation to the City of Kalispell,
as a condition of continuing or initiating
said sewer service.
Any person concerned with the proposed rule may appear at this
hearing and make oral statements or present the same in writing.
Also written comments may be submitted for Council consideration by
delivering them to the Clerk of Council prior to the hearing.
Publish: August 1, 1996
August 8, 1996
August 15, 1996
CITY OF KALISPELL
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE ADOPTION
FOR KALISPELL WATER UTILITY
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of
Kalispell shall consider a proposed addition to the Rules and
Regulations of the Kalispell Water Department at a Public Hearing,
Monday, August 19, 1996, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at
7:00 P.M. The addition to the Rules would take effect after
September 1, 1996.
If adopted, Rule V of the Water Department Regulations shall
be amended by adding the following:
(10) Annexation Required for Initiation or Continuation
of Water Service
Any customer now receiving, or hereafter
initiating, water service supplied by the
Kalispell Water Department, shall be deemed to
have consented to, and waived the right to
protest, annexation to the City of Kalispell,
as a condition of continuing or initiating
said water service.
Any person concerned with the proposed rule may appear at this
hearing and make oral statements or present the same in writing.
Also written comments may be submitted for Council consideration by
delivering them to the Clerk of Council prior to the hearing.
Publish: August 1, 1996
August 8, 1996
August 15, 1996
(iI
01� � !� �11
Incorporated 1892
Telephone (406) 758-7700
FAX (406) 758-7758
Post Office Box 1997
Kalispell, Montana
Zip 59903-1997
ME M 0
To: Mayor & City Council
r
From: Al Thelen, Interim City Manager`
Date: August 16, 1996
Re.: Letter Received From Motel Owners Dated August 15, 1996
I have attached some data relating to individual motel owner's
water and sewer bills under current and proposed rates. While
i
the sewer bills increase about 15%, this is lower than the
average, which is 17%-the difference between the current rate
per 1,000 gallons of $2.54 and the proposed rate of $2.98. The
water rate adjustments for the motels are lower on all of these
bills even though the sprinkling rate is increased from .62
cents per 1,000 gallon to .75 cents. The reason for their net
increases from 10 to 11 percent is directly related to the
increased sewer rates.
Douglas Rauthe
Mayor
Al Thelen
Interim City Manager
City Council
Members:
Gary W. Nystul
Ward I
Cliff Collins
Ward I
Norbert F. Donahue
Ward II
Dale Haarr
Ward II
Jim Atkinson
Ward III
Lauren Granmo
Ward III
Pamela B. Kennedy
Ward IV
M. Duane Larson
Ward IV
a�
tm
c
o
i
00 Q
O C
h Q
6 6
N Q
o C]
tD N
0 0
Of h
C O
tttppp p
t2� Q�
�j N
.Q
O C
�y
4 O
m �
3
t7f �pp
NOpp N
�D 0
m
N
n VN
O LgqDpp
N OhD
tq
{��n
ca
�►�
V) V!
V! w
Kp Np
Mf W
H 6%
63 GW
W! N
V9f 0.
►+
O Q
�,p
Opp)
N
1fT In
ti OD
n n
toC6
O
Of
h O
erg N
{Mp
OOhpp (ph�p
N
M
N
(n N
N N
�A {pp
lN'
1p�
lNn Oho
N h
N
r
r
U
df V)
V) V!
603 dR
V! fH
V) V)
V) V%
603 69
N Vf
V! V!
m
C�
aR
— to
O to
co co
O CJ7
O
V N
N m
N
i
N Q
In Q
Q Q
N Q
N N
ee
N
r
IA Q
r r
Q IA
r
ai 't
r
Q '7
C]
q
p�
Op/ N
V'
N N
OD ID
Qh7
N tQp
pp ti
O �Qy
GIx O
N Q
O pM
IA
oor
Cn C)
N M
(DU
tG
3
(D r
Q
W
N /+1
M(D
O N
r N
r
r
v
�
N
Q:
N (ND
OJ OOO
00 n
N *0
OO N
tfi
N
<O
Q1
fO
t0
N
N O
(O N
N
M
M 8
N
N N
(D
N
On M
Q h
N
(A
�
N O
h Q
hh Q
D7 W
N O
a
Q r
N
'J Q/
0
N N
r
r
U
V1 V!
V3, V!
611 b%
VS V!
V! V►
V! 69
V} V!
Vf V)
V) V>
(D
Im
*
3` S
T O`
N q
C
S T
S
O C
(O co(O
00 O
N O
r (O
Q O
r
O
r (n
W LQ
o
i
7 N
N
N N
N N
N
^ PM')
N
Q
79
N N
O O
9 8
(vD Q
O
{p
m Qp��
pM (0
8 8
CQg ���ppp
(pp
�
(f3
t
N
O 01
O
Q
�OQp
l0
It
M N
N
SA
N In
N
v�
r N
N
N M
eh-
n,
V! ar
V► V!
up4 Vf
611, V!
691
6% V3,
us 6-p
(n V!
h
GO
O6p9 OVp►
O O
INA
pW
OD O
00 eQ-
N O
co
00 (ND_
Ci
OD n
pp��
U2
tff
•N_- tOD
�
(��I
N W
coNcoN
ONO
000 hhQ
W N
N (D
(n
(7
cl
N
r N
V),
V> V:
V► V►
(p, 64
a► V>
d�
S2
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
tvN7
N
0 C
r
N
N
c
o
c
eo
$
u
25
Q
2Q5
25
C
J
��pp
p�p��
N
Ts
C14
H �
M
w
N
R
c
_
m
Ti 0cc
r Y
ac
r
ak
r
r
aE
c
co
0
(y
J
C
w L
C �
O U
N � N
C ID
C_C O
4) C E
L
L 4-
d .0
C N
C G
N Q tQ
Cc N
w 0 0
Q' of
Q. C
L
N C.
m rn
C t6
O c
O c: f0
O 'O N
C O 0
NE 0
p r" C f0
� p 'E c
t° 3
C
CU
m = C N
t E C
: N O
c t5
m
c E
ca cc
Q— '� `v
In O
� 6 E 3
N y
ca
N.�-� y 0
O
U N A
�0rn:
O U t6 y
N
t-
August 15,1996
Dear Mayor Rauthe and City Council Members,
We would like to protest the latest proposed rates for city water and sewer.
While most water users are recieving a reduction, those of us in the lodging
industry are being targeted for an increase. It is true that we use a tremendous
volume of water, especially during the summer months and we are willing to pay
our fair share, but to reduce the rates of all other users and increase only those in
excess of 20,000 gallons per month is unfairly targeting only our industry.
This proposal comes at a particularly bad time for lodging properties in
Kalispell. This year we are seeing significantly less revenues due to a
combination of reduced tourism throughout the Northwest and an overcapacity of
hotel rooms in the Flathead Valley. This is combined with operating cost
increases due to recent increases in water and sewer rates, an increase in
natural gas rates last month, increased telephone rates, increased insurance
costs and proposed legislation to increase the minimum wage on a federal and
state level. The minimum wage alone will have a tremendous affect on the
profitability of our labor intensive industry. We are being squeezed from all
directions and this sewer rate increase will be one more factor that may
ultimately lead to the closure or reorganization of some lodging properties.
We are enclosing some water usage figures from 1995 for several properties
in Kalispell. Also we are enclosing dollar amounts that reflect the cost increases
to us based on your proposal and last year's water and sewer usage. As you can
see, this is a significant increase that is being forced with few exceptions on only
the lodging industry.
In conclusion, we understand that a modern, adequate water and sewer
system are both necessary and expensive. We only ask that this cost be
distributed fairly amoung all users.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
92
F1 a 14 L
Al
1995 Actual Water Consumption And Projected Costs:
Consumption Range
Total Water/Sewer
Bill
(Gallons/2 Month period)
Current Rate
Proposed %Change
HERO INN
226000 Low
$1015.45
$1126.13
10.9%
509000 High
$1603.87
$1775.48
10.7%
BLUE AND WHITE
262000 Low
$1159.89
$1286.31
10.8%
575000 High
$2921.43
$3234.02
10.8%
Projected 1996 Increase
Total 1995 Gallons
Projected Cost Increase
1,998,000
$804.12
2,450,600
$1063.91
MMM
t I IT*
&Lal I 'taw waiy-ed IW_jV-Jt to nroteAa-r-f exation
IORM
I purchased my property in August of 1992. This waiver was not a condition of the title
search. Personally, I would prefer to have an independent source of water, as the existing
water service is much less than adequate. I have continually had low water pressure, high
water bills, and no assistance from the Water Department. It has been a continual
aggravation to try to obtain information, assistance, guidance or courteous treatment from
the employees at the City of Kalispell Water Department. As a result of the disdain and/or
complete lack of response to my inquiries, requests for assistance, (written and verbal) and
complaints regarding the less than satisfying service, I deem the City has waived their right
to annex a resident and tax paying citizen of the community.
I balk at the attitude of the power of eminent domain. Being familiar with the current anti-
government sentiment, which is pervasive nationwide, I struggle to understand why the
City perceives itself to be exempt from the agitation, distrust, and rebellion that the
County government must contend with. This attitude of power, force and total disregard
for the taxpaying public's sentiment, to grab money in order to pursue apparent personal
agendas, is the cause of the discontent, distrust, frustration and anger towards those in
authority who are misusing their position of power for control over their constituency.
Being quite familiar with the problems of growth the county is experiencing, I understand
the need for money to help resolve some of the issues. However, the power of eminent
domain disenfranchises the very citizenry you are seeking to obtain increased tax dollars
from, and results in further alienation, frustration, and animosity. I am a strong proponent
of being able to speak up about what is important for each citizen's quality of life. This is
the concept of the "neighborhood plan" that the county is utilizing. I support working
together to improve the community. However, the enjoyment of my home is being
continually bombarded by actions I directly attribute to the City. The widening of the
streets, with no corresponding enforcement of the speed limits in residential areas;
considerable money spent on improving roads, and alleys, which promotes more traffic at
increased speeds, without STOP signs to promote safety on residential streets; no
enforcement of the noise ordinance; light pollution from too many street lights, which are
not shielded, and thus make the City, an inconsiderate neighbor.
Another major complaint I have with the City's action is the aggressive expansion of the
City airport without requiring the users of the airport to be good neighbors, again no
enforcement of the noise ordinance or requirement to meet a decibel level that is "kinder
and gentler" to those who live in the community. I have chosen to live in the higher
density city environment in order to maintain open spaces which are important to my
quality of life. I am philosophically opposed to further impacting the surrounding open
spaces by building a home "out in the county". Being told, in no uncertain terms, that I am
"deemed to have given up my rights" as a citizen and tax payer, in exchange for even more
taxes and "services" I consider obnoxious, i.e. more street lights, more noise, more traffic,
more vandalism, more crime, etc., because of my choice of location, does not promote
cooperation.
If annexation includes courteous treatment for the increased tax dollars paid, as well as
services which would truly enable the community to be a desirable place to live, then I
would support the decision. however, heavy handed tactics to wrench more money out
of the property owning residents of the community is going to result in even more growth
problems, as these citizens flee to those very open spaces that are theoretically more "user
friendly".
This notice has provided me an opportunity to "vent" and I would hope that the City
Council will recognize that they do serve at the pleasure of the voting public. Being
annexed into the City will give me a voting right to voice my concerns.
Signed
o
Kalispell,`'i