Last Chance to Slow Down the Sewer Rate Increases



On the increase in viable waste water
treatment, Membrane Technology
 incorporates controlled biomass retention



The Service Committee will meet tomorrow (Wed Mar 21) at 6:30 one last time before Council votes on the sewer rate increases. The Administration hopes to have Council approve the increases at a Special Council Meeting Mon Mar 26 – in time to collect them for the 2^nd quarter. Many questions raised still remain unanswered.   

The Administration has asked Council to approve a 32% increase effective April 1^st in large part to fund anticipated changes required by the EPA to bring the City into compliance with the Clean Water Act. If approved, residential users will see rates increase $12/mcf (approx 7,500 gallons). To get an idea what it would cost you, check your water bill usage. Multiply that by $12 and then again by 4 (quarters). The total is your annual increase. These rate increases also are not final. More increases are due come fall.

But questions remain. Included in the increases is enough to make up for the 2mill levy voters rejected in 2010. What part of “NO” does the Administration not understand and respect even less?

In 2008 Mayor Cervenik came to Council requesting an increase of $2/mcf per year for the Peterson Fund for 5 years. The estimated $5million raised would replace the City’s 17 CSOs (Combined Sewer Overflows). Council approved the increases.

At the Mar 12 Executive Finance Committee Meeting on the new Membrane Technology, the Administration shocked some by admitting that 3 years later, no CSOs had been replaced because EPA had yet to authorize the plan. And that even if there had been authorization, there just wasn’t enough money. Consumption was down. The money raised to replace CSOs was spent on other sewer repairs.

Membrane Technology does seem a good way to go. But, while fairly confident of EPA approval, CT Consultants - the City's engineering firm - could not guarantee the EPA would approve the plan. Until it does, slow down. Find a way to offset the increases. Councilwoman Scarniench has suggested eliminating the Street Lighting Fee in exchange. Great idea except the Mayor told Council he needs that fee for cash reserves. Then get rid of the Garbage Tax. By the Mayor’s own admission, tax revenues are ahead of projections and the City is solvent thru 2013.

Lastly, the Administration has no plan for doing anything that can divert storm water out of the sewers - something the EPA highly encourages and that Councilman Langman’s research has shown will save money at the front and back ends.

Council is being asked to vote for an increase of $12/mcf to fund a plan the EPA has not authorized. Is that ethical? Council is being asked to approve a plan that does nothing to lessen the amount of storm water that goes into the system. Is that smart? Council is being asked to sidestep the voter’s NO to Issue 2. Is that good representation?

Now if you’re okay with all this, fine. But if you’ve got concerns, tomorrow may be your last opportunity to influence Council to wait until the City has something in writing from the EPA. How sad it would be if after the City invested $11 million in engineering fees, $1.5million into the Old Alexander’s property, and another $100 million or so into Membrane Technology, and $20 million or so into sewer line replacements, the EPA said, “Sorry, not good enough. There’s no green infrastructure here.”

Tomorrow night's meeting is at 6:30 in Council Chambers. The ball is in your court.