Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wastewater topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves updated intermunicipal wastewater agreement clarifying plant capacity sharing

Ithaca Common Council · June 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Ithaca Common Council voted to authorize the acting city manager to execute an updated intermunicipal wastewater agreement clarifying percent-of-ownership and how excess capacity and wet-weather flows are allocated among joint owners; staff said the Ithaca plant's average daily capacity is 13 million gallons and the update reflects longstanding operational arrangements.

The Ithaca Common Council on June 10 authorized the acting city manager to execute an updated intermunicipal wastewater agreement that modernizes language on ownership shares and the allocation of excess treatment capacity.

Councilmember Mr. Trumbull summarized the measure as an update to bring the agreement —to date— and to clarify how owners' shares are determined by annual water-consumption data. Assistant superintendent Mr. Gibson explained the operating context: the Ithaca treatment plant has a roughly 13 million gallon average daily flow capacity and current average daily flows are well below that threshold, leaving excess capacity that has historically been shared across jurisdictions.

Mr. Gibson described inflow and infiltration (I&I) as a driver of wet-weather flows and explained how a bypass arrangement (referred to in the presentation as a Klein Road diversion) allows a neighboring village to use Ithaca's capacity during surges. The updated agreement clarifies percent ownership, capacity allocation, and how costs and future work will be apportioned by consumption.

Council asked whether the amendment locked the city into rates for the next decade (staff said it did not) and sought clarification about how major capital renovations would interface with the agreement. Council then voted unanimously to approve the resolution authorizing execution of the updated agreement.

Council recorded no opposing votes; staff indicated the update is largely clarifying and administrative in purpose rather than establishing a new rate schedule.