Its baaaaack! Sort of.

The third time was not a charm for a proposed $10-per-month, per household municipal fee that was voted down two weeks ago but a fourth version has been submitted by one the council members who opposed the other three versions. But at least one of the original sponsors said he thinks that the newest version could cause some serious bookkeeping headaches.

Councilman Richard Price sponsored the newest version that is similar to the others except that it allows for an annual refund for each residence in which the primary income earner pays more than $60 per year in income tax.

So, the proposal will cost retirees and others with no monthly income the full $10 a month but if someone pays any amount up to a maximum of $60 per year in income taxes, then they will receive a like amount refunded - if they paid their bills on time.

"I feel this is somewhat of a compromise between the different portions of council. I don't think it will be a paperwork nightmare," Price said. "If it is something they want to happen then it can happen."

Price said it is still unclear exactly how much money the proposal would generate but worst case scenario is that it would be at least be half of the $550,000 projected by the previous municipal fee. This sum added to the approximately $350,000 that will be generated from the city's reciprocity change would help the city balance the budget.

The plan is something that Price said he has worked on with the city's attorneys and finance director for some time. He plans to refer it to finance so the plan will have plenty of time to be debated before any votes are taken.

Charlene Thomas, the administrator in the city's water department for 20 years, called the plan almost impossible to implement because of the way it involves tax information. Thomas added that no one on the council asked the department if it was possible.

"It is going to be a mess. There is no way we would have the time with only two employees," she said. "We hardly have enough time with all the paperwork we have now. They have no idea what it would do to us."

It will not be easy for the city's finance and income tax departments either. City Finance Director Cindy Anderson said that individuals will have to get an affidavit stating that they paid their taxes, take it to the water department to confirm, then the water department will have the finance department write those individuals checks.

Price said he does not believe it will that much of a burden for the department.

Councilman Jim Tordiff has advocated for the fee all along, but said that opposes this version because it complicates matters for no reason and should have been adopted on its own.

"I am not going to support this because it will be a bookkeeping nightmare for the water department," he said. "…I would support an amended version. I am still for a $10 municipal fee."

Mayor John Elam said he still prefers the normal $10 fee but this is "next closest to the right thing that I have seen."

Council will also consider legislation to:

4Authorize the mayor to award two contracts totaling $393,890 to The Righter Company for improvements to the Center Street Landing.

4Authorize the mayor to enter into a confidentiality agreement with Intermet Corporation, the owner of the former Ironton Iron property. This will allow Intermet to share with the city, consultants and its attorneys information from past studies. It will be the first step to performing an environmental analysis of the property that may ultimately lead to the city buying the property.

4Authorizing the mayor to charge $25 per hour for rental of the Ironton City Center lobby to any private group or function. There is also a two-hour minimum.