Lincoln City Council
Aldermen asked to approve a Sewer Replacement Rebate Program for
property owners
Action item to be on the Monday voting
agenda
Send a link to a friend
[June 02, 2024]
The
Lincoln City Council will meet at 6 p.m. this evening, Monday June
3rd, for the first voting session of the month. Included on the
agenda will be a motion to establish a Sewer Replacement Rebate
program for residential property owners in Lincoln.
The program will include a rebate to property owners that may be up
to 50 percent, but not more than $5,000 for sewer line replacement
on privately owned property. The program will specify that the money
cannot be used for repair of sewer sections but must be for
replacement of sewer from the “foundation to the tap” into the city
sewer. Among the stipulations for the rebate is a requirement for
three bids on the project, but the bids do not have to be local, and
a 20-year life on the rebate. The 20-year life means that the
property owner may only apply for funding every 20 years. If the
property changes ownership the 20-year clock remains with the
address.
At the Tuesday May 28th meeting of the council, Mayor Tracy Welch
introduced the topic. He said that the need to create an assistance
program for property owners stems from the fact that Lincoln has an
aging sewer infrastructure and that some of the sewer connections in
the city are quite complicated, and many end with the tap being in
the street.
These components add up to very expensive replacements, that put
property owners in hardship. He said that sewer replacement can cost
in the range of $12,000 to $25,000 and some are even more expensive.
When a sidewalk, curb and road have to be dug up to complete the
replacement, the property owner is responsible for fixing those
city-owned components and that adds a lot to the cost. Welch said
what happens often times is that property owners will do a repair on
their property but that is just a temporary fix.
Welch said he hears from property owners often about the issues of
bad sewer lines, and it is troubling to him when he has to say there
is nothing the city can do. He noted as an example a couple who had
moved to Lincoln and the first day in their home they experienced a
sewer back up that ended up being a huge problem with a huge
expense. In order to take care of the problem the couple sold a car
to pay the bills.
The proposed rebate program will be funded by the
Sewer Enterprise Fund and Welch said the recommendation is to
earmark $250,000 per year to rebate awards. If and when the $250K is
expended, then the rebate program would be suspended until the next
fiscal year.
Waste Treatment Manager Andrew Bowns said that the Sewer Enterprise
fund is “healthy,” and the city can afford to set the money aside to
assist property owners. He said that the three bids were needed
because people often when they find they have a sewer problem rush
into making decisions and that is not always a good idea. The three
bids will be from licensed experts qualified to do the complete
replacement, but as stated earlier do not have to be from local
sources.
Bowns added that the $250K is not in the current year budget, but
could be added to the appropriations document for 2024-25, and the
budget adjusted.
Three departments will sign off on each application. Bowns will sign
off on the job, the City Clerk will verify that the owner has no
outstanding balances due to the city, and the Zoning office will
sign off that there are no outstanding ordinance violations fines.
That section of the rule states: “Only property owners with no
outstanding balances/debt/judgement with the City of Lincoln are
eligible for rebate requests. If an owner has an outstanding
balance/debt/judgement to the city, it shall be city council
discretion that approves or denies their request. This must be
presented during public participation of the first committee of the
Whole meeting after submission of the rebate request.”
[to top of second column] |
Alderman Steve Parrott asked how
many sewer replacements occur in the city annually. Bowns said
the figure was well over the 50 per year the rebate program will
cover. He estimated the actual figure would be closer to 100 per
year. He said that he also estimated that there were 20 to 25
partial replacements or repairs that occur annually and that
adding the rebate program could entice those property owners to
go ahead and do the full replacement. Welch added that this was
part of the long-term goal of the project. Getting the sewer
lines replaced, “the right way” will be the best thing for the
property and will reduce repetitive repairs that prove to be
only temporary.
City Treasurer Chuck Conzo said he could certainly work the
dollar amount into the upcoming appropriations document but
would also want to make the correct adjustment to the city’s
budget document. He said he did wonder about the property owners
who have sewer line insurance, would that equate to double
dipping if they used the insurance and the rebate.
Bowns said that most of the insurance policies he
knows of are capped, and the cap is typically well below the total
cost of the replacement. He said that the insurance and the rebate
combined would probably not cover the cost of many of the sewer line
replacement jobs.
He added that there are also cases where that the insurance will
deny the claim, in which case without the rebate program the
property owner would have no help with the replacement.
The city also discussed that where a sidewalk is involved, there is
a remittance for sidewalk repair from the city when the property
owner does the work. The council talked about whether that
remittance could be applicable, thus providing additional support to
the property owner.
Alderwoman Wanda Lee Rohlfs said there were other residual impacts,
such as temporary loss of occupancy due to an unusable sewer. Would
the rebate cover motel stays or other related expenses? Welch said
no, the money could only go toward the sewer replacement.
Alderman Kevin Bateman asked if regarding the sidewalk and street,
could the city do the repair then bill the property owner. Welch
said that the city needed to take care not to add to the workload of
the street department.
Street Superintendent Walt Landers said there was another issue
there as well. When the city repairs or replaces sidewalks, they are
required by law to make the sidewalk ADA (American Disabilities Act)
compliant. The property owner does not have that requirement. He
said if it were a corner property for example, the city would have
to add the ramp feature to the sidewalk which would add to the
overall cost of the project.
During the discussion time, there were several comments and
questions regarding looking at the histrionics of a property. Was
the owner habitually late with sewer payments? What if they came in
and got current just so they could get the rebate then went back to
being delinquent?
As discussion wound down, Welch noted that often the council
discovers tweaks that need to be done to a program or project after
the fact. He recommended that the council approve what will be
placed before them on Monday night, and as time goes by if
adjustments need to be made, they can consider those changes
separately.
The action item will be motion number 9G on the Monday evening
agenda. As is always the case, the council has the right to table
the motion if they feel they are not prepared to make an informed
decision.
[Nila Smith]
|