City Public Works staff presented proposed amendments June 5 to the general ordinance (Chapter 200‑24, Article 2) that would let the city apply sewer-user charges to measured inflow and infiltration (I&I) and otherwise use existing ordinance fines and court remedies to force correction.

Public Works Director (referred to in the meeting as Director Norris) told the committee that I&I is “an enormous problem” that increases treatment volumes and costs for ratepayers. He cited monthly production and treatment figures: in April the city produced an average of 1,740,000 gallons per day of drinking water and treated 4,220,000 gallons per day at the wastewater plant; in May those figures were 2,120,000 (drinking) and 5,100,000 (wastewater), and he said an August storm two years ago produced a spike of about 11,000,000 gallons a day at one pump station.

Director Norris said staff considered using the existing sewer rate to charge measured I&I to the responsible sewer customer where flow can be quantified, but that approach is not currently in the ordinance. “The course we’re taking with that particular customer is a more of a legal course of action, and the ordinance does have provisions for fines,” he said, adding that one large customer was required to submit a plan to reduce I&I or face court and fines.

Staff stressed they intend to target larger commercial and multifamily sources first. Director Norris recommended omitting single-family homes from a billing approach for now because the city lacks a reliable way to quantify flows from individual houses; he said since single-family inflow is harder to measure “we’re not advocating for home inspections” and recommended further discussion. Director Grant (Codes) described the department’s enforcement approach as education-first with voluntary compliance and escalation to fines only when necessary.

Director Sullivan (Finance) advised that the proposed fee mechanism should be included in the city’s schedule of fees and noted practical questions about billing: whether the charge is billed as a penalty or as a regular user fee, and how delinquency would be handled (for example, water service termination is possible but sewer termination is not a straightforward enforcement remedy).

Committee members asked staff to consult the city attorney and to refine language about single-family homes. Staff said they will return with revised text for further committee review.

Less critical details: staff described the city’s I&I monitoring network of 26 catchment areas and said industry guidance suggests infiltration can be reduced about 50 percent by pipe rehab, while inflow (illegal connections such as sump pumps and roof drains) is considered 100 percent correctable if identified and removed.