11-25-13 Common Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 25,2013 water quality standards which were eliminated from this presentation. So in light of the discussion we have to have more information. Eric Horvath: I took that out just because I think behind the whole thought that's what was driving it, but there is nothing in the consent decree that says that. So I was just being honest with the issue. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: But at the last public hearing it was in the presentation. Eric Horvath: It was still in there, absolutely. Councilmember Varner: There is nothing in the consent decree that requires a Michigan standard? Eric Horvath: What is requires is that we disinfect each of those overflows when they overflow. That's what it requires. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: However, at the last presentation it was listed. Eric Horvath: Yeah, and the impetus's behind that when they were negotiating with the EPA and DOJ and Jack can speak to this, was to meet the water quality standard at the Michigan State line. What they did was a river model that looked at the water quality impacts on the River and turned off all sources except South Bend CSO's and they said, does the river water quality meet the Michigan standard at the Michigan state line if South Bend sewers are overflowing into the river at the nine different places, the four(4) overflows per year. It didn't meet that. Councilmember Varner: In reality you can't turn off all the other sources? If it rains from here to Mishawaka then it's faulty and if we are using that to spend $40 million dollars per tank we need to argue that. Enough common sense tells me that you can't use that as a model to lay this on the City of South Bend,unless we offered to do that because somebody thought that might be a neat idea. If we offered that to the EPA or something like that. Chairperson White: I think we need to have that clarified, and also as we continue to move forward that's an area where additional information is going to be needed. Councilmember Oliver Davis: Because that's what he said was the impetus's behind it. But there is a difference between what the impetus is behind and what's written it and legally documented. That's what I wanted us to have a better understanding of that. Because the impetus behind something is somebody's interpretation regarding at how we look at life and everything. I know I didn't go to any law school, but there is a whole different ball game behind that. Eric Horvath: The wording didn't change, that we need to disinfect all of the overflows that we have, okay, let's be clear about that. The consent decree requires every overflow be disinfected. The reason that they were given was because it needs to meet water quality standards at the Michigan State line. That hasn't changed. Chairperson White: I am going to ask our attorney to go back and pull out those minutes when we had the discussion about Michigan and the impact. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: The concern that I have is that we want to make sure that what is of record with the Office of the City Clerk is accurate. And at the last presentation this slide that was given to the Council and the public stated disinfect overflows in order to meet Michigan water quality standards at the state line. It was listed under the header; if you go to slide eight you can see that you have disinfected overflows. Chairperson White: So I am going to ask our attorney to work with the City Attorney and with Eric to make sure that the language is in line with terms in the consent decree. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill,proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. 10