Item 3: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

Mr. Pryor thought the bill would have made more sense in an earlier age when manufacturing was dominant, but it made less sense in an electronic age when many services or products were no longer provided in the United States. He thought the bill well-intentioned but poorly crafted. Mayor Piercy was supportive of the concept underlying the bill but believed it needed work. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to take a position of Priority 2, Monitor, on the bill. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. SB 513 Mr. Breitenstein said that staff member Therese Walch of the Engineering Division had recommended the bill be dropped from further consideration because it had no impact inside the city limits. Mr. McVey said the city had some septic systems but the Department of Environmental Quality paid for inspections. Ms. Bettman suggested the support recommendation be retained because the bill would impact the City. Mr. McVey said the reason to support the bill would be the environmental benefits of monitoring. There was no objection to the staff recommendation. SB 737 Ms. Bettman acknowledged the higher threshold imposed by the bill but she was disturbed to see the staff recommend opposition to a bill that would protect water quality. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mayor Piercy, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 3, Support. Responding to a question from Mr. Pryor, Mr. Breitenstein said the staff recommendation was not related to water quality, but to the proposed approach, which was technical impractical and economically infeasible. There were much better practices and means of controlling cumulative toxins, such as source control. The toxins were present and ubiquitous in the environment and methods of regulation in manufacturing, in disposal, in pre-treatment, and in public education would be a better investment in controlling toxins. Ms. Bettman recalled similar reasons for opposing the bill last time, but without a definitive threshold, none of what Mr. Breitenstein mentioned would happen. She maintained that it was important to draw a line and stop polluting the state’s waterways, which she maintained were horribly polluted. Ms. Wilson said the bill was not scheduled for a hearing. She noted that several bills regarding mixing zones had been introduced this session. Mr. Breitenstein noted the community’s investments in the treatment plant to address capacity and wet weather issues that would cost around $150 million. He said that waste discharge permit renewal process was underway and included a proposed limit on one parameter, temperature, that could cost up to $54 million to address. Mayor Piercy understood Ms. Bettman’s position on water cleanliness and the challenges of dealing with toxins in terms of where and who paid. She was unsure that the bill was the best way to deal with the problem, and was more comfortable with taking a position of monitor. Mr. Pryor agreed he would be more MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations March 22, 2007 Page 5