 |
Despite assertions from a commissioner that Spokane Valley has “repeatedly refused to commit” to Spokane County for sewer service, the city made moves last week to do just that.
The City Council, at its June 30 meeting, tentatively agreed with the plans to extend an olive branch to Spokane County for a proposed agreement that would commit Spokane Valley as a customer for a $170 million wastewater treatment plant that is currently under construction by the county.
The proposed interlocal agreement, which is expected to see final approval by the council next Tuesday for the city’s end of the agreement, would call for Spokane Valley to send its sewage to the facility, provided the county can evade any worst-case scenarios that would force a possible area-wide building moratorium that could impede growth and development.
The proposal could help thaw a cooling phase between the city and county, which has flummoxed county commissioners who have been frustrated with the city’s stalling.
“Spokane Valley has repeatedly refused to commit to not compete against the very county plant they asked us to shoulder the political and financial risk for,” county Commissioner Mark Richard wrote in a column that appeared in last week’s Spokane Valley News Herald. “This position threatens the entire project and the monthly rates for every sewer customer in the county.”
Spokane County has planned to move forward with bond sales for the treatment plant later this month. But interest rates could climb if no agreement between the city and county in place, the commissioners worry.
Still, there are elements that need to be worked out, said Mike Connelly, city attorney and the principle architect for the draft agreement. For example, a proposed sewer advisory committee would be comprised of a city council member, a county commissioner and the county utilities director. Spokane
Valley Mayor Richard Munson is sour on that arrangement, as the city will be the biggest user of the plant.
“If we’re going to be responsible for 70 percent of the business, we should have a lot more than just one out of three,” he said. “As a minimum, I think it should be 50-50. I would prefer it to be 3-2 in favor (of the city).”
Connelly added the city would assume no risk for the bonds under the terms of the agreement. If that provision remains in place, the committee would remain advisory and not regulatory, even if the city gains a seat for a more prominent role.
On Tuesday, the commissioners agreed to hold off making any decision on rate changes or financing for the treatment plant until an accord is struck with the city of Spokane Valley. Talks between the city and county won’t resume until at least next week when Connelly returns from vacation.
At the suggestion that the city is looking for a provision to opt out of the agreement if the county is unable to provide service for 120 days or more, Commissioner Todd Mielke seemed to think that wouldn’t be an issue.
“I can’t fathom how that would happen,” he said.
Richard wanted to make sure that there was no language in the agreement that would allow the city to look to Spokane or anywhere else for a “less expensive” provider.
“I know they’ve talked about looking for a better deal,” he said.
|
|
By
Mike Huffman
