LOCKPORT — The city treasurer’s office will adjust the city refuse collection bills of property owners who didn’t own and occupy property for the entire Jan. 1 to Oct. 10, 2011, billing period.

City Treasurer Michael White confirmed Tuesday that his office will reduce the bills of property owners who can show, through property documents, that they didn’t use 91⁄2 months of city refuse pickup service last year.

The new policy comes after a couple of property owners complained about the $147 per property city refuse bill. In both cases, the owners said they had purchased property in the spring or early summer of 2011 and didn’t think it was fair to be stuck with charges for refuse service dating back to Jan. 1.

Homeowner Nicole Fragale, 2 Harding Ave., called the US&J this past Friday to report she was having difficulty getting the treasurer’s office to agree to reduce her city refuse bill. She purchased and moved into her house in March 2011 and thought the city ought to knock the equivalent of two months’ of refuse charges off her bill. Since receiving a bill in late November, Fragale said, she was not able to get agreement from White, whose office set and sent the bills.

The treasurer charged every property in the city a $147 flat fee for 2011 city refuse collection. The Common Council did not include public collection costs in the 2011 budget and therefore did not raise money from property tax, because it knew the city would privatize the service at some point in 2011 but did not know exactly when.

The $147-per-parcel fee was derived by the treasurer in November, after all city spending on refuse collection between Jan. 1 and Oct. 10 — labor, fuel, equipment, landfilling fees and other inputs — was accounted for. The fee represents each serviced property’s equal share of the grand total, tax-exempt entities included.

Fragale said she has no complaint with privatization or the city charging for its collection service, but she objected to being charged for service she and her husband didn’t receive.

Over a month ago, she said, she asked the treasurer’s office to adjust her bill, to reflect her fair share of service cost from March onward only, and couldn’t get satisfaction. She pursued pro-rating on the advice of Dawn Timm, the city’s refuse adviser, and then was told by treasury staff that it was not possible. She said White himself told her , “the mayor’s budget doesn’t allow for it.”

“They’re acting like they’re just the collector and they don’t have any control over the matter. They told me non-payment would be a lien against my property,” Fragale said. “It’s not that I can’t pay the bill, it’s the principle of the matter. ... I don’t think it’s fair for me to ask the previous owner (to pay a portion), since the bill didn’t exist at the time we closed.”

Mayor Michael Tucker knows of another property owner who bought and occupied property in June 2011 and questioned a bill for refuse service dating back to January 2011. After his request for bill pro-rating was turned down by the treasurer’s office, Tucker said, the new owner paid the full bill and struck a gentleman’s agreement with the prior owner for reimbursement of a portion.

Pro-rating is the treasurer’s call, Tucker said, not the mayor’s or the Council’s.

“I took it up with Mike last week and he said the (billing) module is not set up for that,” Tucker said. “Personally I don’t see the big deal in adjusting a few bills; it’s a question of fairness. But Mike doesn’t have to listen to me.”

On Tuesday, White said that it took some time to determine the legalities of refuse bill adjustment. City Attorney John Ottaviano sought opinions from the New York Conference of Mayors and the state comptroller’s office how to pursue payment from prior owners of serviced property, so that the city recovers all that it spent on 2011 collection. The money was akin to a loan from the general fund and it should be repaid in full, he said.

“The issue is unprecedented; before I OK’d anything, I needed to know what we can and can’t do,” White said. “I assured Ms. Fragale we were working on it, and we truly were.”

According to Ottaviano, anyone who bought property after Jan. 1, 2011, can pursue city refuse bill adjustment. The property owner must present copies of the deed and closing documents, to show refuse charges were not collected in the closing cost, and the treasurer’s office will refigure the bill based on the closing date. The office will then pursue the remainder of the bill from the property’s prior owner, through his or her closing attorney, he said.

The treasurer’s office does not know how many properties might be eligible for refuse bill reduction due to changed ownership in 2011. White said he’s not expecting a flood of requests.

“We’re talking about a $10 to $20 (difference); most people probably are not bothering with it,” Ottaviano added.