Bellevue will take its proposed 2011 budget down to the wire, with the major points of contention left unresolved despite extensive debate at a special meeting on Tuesday.

Council reached a consensus on only one of three sticking points, that of next year’s garbage fee increase. Major points that could sway a final vote on the budget on Dec. 28 are the sewer surcharge and a raise for the public works supervisor.

The budget originally called for a hefty increase in the 2011 garbage collection fee, from the current $159 to $190 per year, with the hike attributed to the need to compensate for people who do not pay their bills.

An error in calculating that figure has resulted in a proposal to reduce the increase to $165 for people who pay the entire amount when billed at the beginning of the year, and $175 for those who opt to make payments.

Council president Kathy Coder said that the borough’s actual cost to pay the contractor comes out to $162.12 per housing unit. The remaining $2.88 constitutes an administrative fee to cover the borough’s billing costs.

Director of administrative services Doug Sample said that the fee still charges all property owners for the fees not paid by a few. Bellevue has a 93 percent collection rate for garbage collection fees, he said.

Sample said that the initial round of letters to delinquent garbage accounts resulted in the collection of some $23,000, and collection efforts will continue after the first of the year, with notices warning of legal action.

“We haven’t been doing our job,” said Mayor George Doscher.

“No, you haven’t,” Sample said.

Officials agreed on the lower increase and the addition of the early-pay incentive for garbage fees, but remained at odds when it came to the sewer surcharge. Switching from a flat fee of $19 per quarter to one based on water usage is expected to increase the surcharge for most property owners in 2011.

Sample said that the average Bellevue household uses about 15,000 gallons of water per quarter, which at a usage-based rate of $3 per 1,000 gallons would mean a surcharge of $45 per quarter, compared to the $19 now paid.

Coder and council member David Gillingham Jr. pointed out that Bellevue’s fee, even at the increased rate, will fall at about the midpoint of charges levied by other municipalities in Allegheny County. Coder said that in some towns, residents pay as much as $7 or $8 per 1,000 gallons of water used.

Some council members, however, were concerned that next year’s sewer fund budget was doing more than covering the borough’s sewer-related costs.

“I just know that we are padding this up a little bit,” said council member Linda Woshner.

That seemed to be confirmed by engineer John Rusnak, who told council that the increased surcharge would give the borough a badly needed reserve fund or “cushion” for future sewer projects.

“There are a lot of expenses that are going to be staring the borough in the face over the next two years,” he said.

Rusnak said that it will cost $215,000 to $220,000 next year to correct sewer line defects identified in 2002, as mandated by a federal administrative consent order (ACO). Bellevue is a year behind in addressing those mandates, he said, and no one yet knows what requirements will be coming from ALCOSAN in the future.

Woshner and council member Jane Braunlich continued objecting to charging property owners a surcharge from which $150,000 is slated to be transferred to the borough’s general fund to cover the cost of the borough renting equipment back to itself at a rate of $50 to $100 per hour. Sample had defended the transfer as a means of more accurately itemizing the borough’s actual sewer-related expenses.

“You can itemize costs without charging residents again for the same equipment,” Woshner said.

Braunlich said that officials were attempting to balance the borough’s budget -- which includes salaries and benefits for new full-time positions -- with the sewer surcharge.

“If that $150,000 didn’t exist, how would you balance that budget?” she asked.

She suggested charging a fee of only $2 per 1,000 gallons of water and eliminating the new positions from the borough’s 2011 payroll.

Doscher suggested that the increased fee at least be phased in over the next two years, with possibly a rate of $2 per 1,000 gallons in 2011, and $3 the next year.

Officials also remained divided over whether the public works supervisor should be the borough’s only noncontract employee to receive a pay raise next year.

Supervisor Tony Barbarino spoke to council, and clarified that although an 8 percent salary raise had been proposed for him in 2010, he actually received a 6 percent increase, which brought him closer to the salaries received by his “peers,” he said.

Barbarino said that his efforts to convince the gas utility company to extend paving on Maryland and Forest avenues saved the borough about $100,000 this year, and the 3 percent salary increase he was requesting would cost Bellevue only $1,667.

Council members agreed that Barbarino had done an excellent job during the year, but some argued that the general economic climate of the country, the borough’s particular fiscal state and the matter of fairness weighed against giving Barbarino the raise.

“I cannot say no to Joe and yes to Joan,” said Braunlich.

“Our residents are hurting,” Woshner said, adding that people were losing their jobs, taking pay cuts and being reduced from full to part-time work schedules by employers.

Council member Jim Viscusi said that the issue was not whether anyone deserved a raise, but whether the borough “can afford it, and I don’t think we can.”

“We have to get back on our feet financially,” he added.

After a brief executive session, council returned to consider a proposal to give Barbarino a bonus in 2011 rather than a salary increase. It was proposed that he receive a $1,000 bonus, and two other administrative employees get bonuses of $250 each. Council member Susan Viscusi noted that whatever officials chose to call it, money still was being spent and not everyone was receiving it.

Coder suggested that both the salary increase and bonuses be left out of the budget, and she would pay Barbarino the bonus “out of my own pocket.” Coder said that she believed other people, such as residents of Maryland Avenue, would contribute to the bonus.

Council will decide these issues during the final reading of the budget and salary ordinances at the Dec. 28 council meeting.