Ephrata talks septic system

EPHRATA - Ephrata plans to allow septic systems to stay until they fail or the house is sold.

The city council discussed a proposed change to its sewer ordinance, after receiving public comment about requiring property owners within 200 feet of the sewer line to connect.

City Administrator Wes Crago presented a memo with the new proposed changes. The city would require high use and residential septic systems to be pumped and inspected every five years. Commercial and low-use septic systems would be required to be pumped and inspected every 10 years.

"All septic systems regardless of location, in or outside of the 200-foot limit, will be inspected and pumped ... That will be at the owner's expense," he said. "The Grant County Health District will perform the inspections and they have their own set of criteria for how that works. The city won't be determining whether somebody passes or doesn't pass."

The proposal also changes the 200-foot requirement. In prior drafts, people were required to connect when the sewer line came within 200 feet of the property line. The new proposal changed it to 200 feet of the residence.

"In most cases these are residential units, so it would be from the house to the main line, not the property line," Crago said.

The new proposal allows existing septic systems to remain until they fail, the inspection isn't reported or the property is sold.

"There were really two competing issues for staff to try and wrestle with," Crago said. "We don't want septic (systems) forever in the city. We want people to connect and there should be a timeline for sun-setting them ... At the same time, we don't want to put a massive burden, or a potentially massive burden on homeowners with very little warning."

The city staff's solution was to trigger connection to the sewer after the property is sold, Crago said. The new property owner would have 60-days to connect if the building is within 200 feet of the sewer pipe within 60-days.

"That allows the property owner to plan for it. They are aware of it, when they put their house up for sale," he said. "It gives them the control, the choice and the decision when that would take place."

If people connect voluntarily, the city would waive the $750 connection fee. The new proposal also allows any septic system outside of the 200-foot distance to rebuild the system.

Jo Maedke, an Ephrata resident, questioned the mandatory inspections and a portion of the new proposal requiring people with septic systems to pay $27 a month in sewer fees.

Maedke and her husband built their home in a more rural area of the city, she said. At the time, they had the system inspected by the health district.

"When you finish that process, you think you have a legal, clean, functioning system and I feel like as we start to go through these things, it's a bit punitive, like the rules are changing for what we were OK'd on," she said.

She said the pumping and inspections create a big impact for people and families that are struggling.

"You have people who are on a fixed income and retired. So when you sit in your chair and you think about how you want to do things correctly, I do want you to be compassionate about that," Maedke said. "I'd much rather see something where if your septic system fails, then you have to have it pumped and inspected at that time."

She said the new proposal wasn't horrible, but what she found unfair was the difference between residential and commercial requirements.

"So we're going to do a business at 10 (years), but a residence at five (years)," Maedke said. "I'd much prefer for you to extend that time out because that is going to be a cost for people."

Councilmember Ben Davis pointed out the standard for pumping residences and high-use septic tanks is about five years, saying a lot of people may not pump, but it is a standard people would recognize.

"So if that's the case, we're not asking for more than what's a recognized standard," he said.

When Mayor Chris Jacobson asked whether Maedke didn't want the requirement at all, she answered she wanted it set higher.

Councilmember Bruce Reim said he was comfortable with the inspection requirement, since if it isn't inspected and pumped, the system could possibly fail.

"By having it inspected and pumped you might be saving the owner undue costs," he said. "It sounds like ... other (cities are requiring) them to be inspected and pumped at a shorter duration ... In a perfect world, I'd like to see everybody hook up, and just be done with it, but I don't think we're going to get that."

Councilmember Heidi Schultheis disagreed with allowing the exemptions, saying the larger idea was to get rid of septic systems in the city.

"So I think the exemptions should be eliminated," she said. "I don't think we should have to wait until the sale or the transfer of ownership of the property, I actually think it will not be beneficial to the owner."

Schultheis pointed out people with a septic tank trying to sell a home will have a harder time, when potential buyers know it needs to be connected to the sewer system.

Councilmember Mark Wanke agreed with the exemptions and the inspections. He pointed out the city and the homeowners won't know if the systems have failed unless they're inspected.

Councilmember Kathleen Allstot disagreed with the length of time, saying it should be the same for residential and commercial properties.

"I don't think the people who have septic tanks are a bunch of scofflaws and I don't think we need to treat people harshly because they have those septic tanks," she said.

Councilmember Stephanie Knitter agreed with the inspections, echoing Wanke and Reim, saying the city doesn't have any other way of knowing whether they failed.

Davis also agreed with the inspections, saying he was happy with how the new proposal was worded, and the city came quite a ways to finding a compromise.

Maedke also disagreed with the proposed $27 fee, saying they would be paying for a service they don't receive.

"If you were in town and fiber went past your house, but you didn't order fiber and get it put in your house, but the PUD said, 'Fiber is in town, we're going to send you a monthly bill for fiber, even though you're not partaking in it,'" she said. "I feel like the billings we receive monthly are for utilities furnished or services delivered."

The city would likely receive about $17,000 more from the proposed fee, Crago said, adding it wasn't a money-making prospect for the city.

Davis asked how much it would cost the city to track inspections and other administrative costs.

"We know, anticipating, we've talked through a little bit in the office how we would track which ones are septic (systems), when they were last inspected and when the ownership would change notifying that if it wasn't already done," Crago said.

Schultheis supported the fee, since everyone benefits from having a sewer system in the city.

Allstot said she didn't support the monthly fee.

Davis also agreed with charging a fee, suggesting $20. He said someone living in the city limits should be paying a fair share for a system, and he pointed out the city will have costs keeping track of the septic systems in the city.

"Jo, with all due respect, comparing this to fiber or cable, the two voluntary amenities we have available out there, really isn't the ones to use, because the city has no involvement with those," he said. "The city does have involvement with schools, parks, streets, city water and garbage ... Whether you have a car and drive on the roads, you're going to be paying for streets. If you don't have a kid in school right now, you're going to be paying for schools."

Wanke and Councilmember Tony Mora questioned the fee, at first mentioning they would accept $10 or $15. Later, they didn't support the fee. Wanke accepted $10 before the council reached a consensus of $15.