WMAC Meeting Minutes December 6, 2011
Attendees: David Crosby, Chair; Anne Carney, David Hearne, Paul Lauenstein, Len Sekuler
Guests: Eric Hooper – Superintendent, DPW, Selectman Joe Roach, Selectman Richard Powell, Chris Pimentel, Ian Cooke, Nancy Fyler
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM
The minutes of the previous meeting held on Nov.17, 2011 were approved.
Chair David Crosby stated that the meeting was called to meet with the Selectmen to discuss the water department budget and how the goals stated in the master plan could be met. He introduced Eric Hooper to give a power point presentation on the Economics of Water that began with a chart showing the water department budgets from 2008 through the FY2013 proposed budget. He noted that the chart on Budget History did not include borrowing. The second chart explained Projected Revenue Sources for Calendar 2012 amounting to 2.6 M. Chart 3 showed Residential Per Capita Use by Household Size, Chart 4 showed Average Bill and Water Use by Household Size, Chart 5 showed Revenue by Household Size, Chart 6 showed Water Rates from Oct. 1, 1991 through May, 2007. (The charts are an attachment) Eric explained that the operating costs are fairly stable. He said that snow and ice removal during the day is charged to the DPW. Paul L. asked how many personnel are in the water department and Eric answered 13.75 FTE’s. Eric stated that the Master Plan calls for 1.3 M per year in capital improvements. The approved FY2012 budget has 475,000 from taxation and 800,000 from borrowing. Maintenance is included in construction supplies and road materials. Eric then discussed planned versus unplanned maintenance. Water main breaks can be very expensive.
Eric stated that all costs have to be offset by revenue in the water department and feels that the department cannot assume that more than 2/3 of the revenue will come in during the summer months since there could be a ban or a very wet season. The discussion then moved on to the fact that the WMAC’s investigation of rates showed that due to the current rate structure, larger households were paying a disproportionate share of water revenue. Even though the average large household uses water much more efficiently in terms of gallons per person per day, the household pays up to 61% more per gallon than the single person household. The result is that different rate payers pay different amounts for the same gallon of water. The majority of WMAC feels this is unfair since the largest cost is in the delivery system to each household. The committee wanted to make it clear that no matter what rates are approved the WMAC wants to maintain a base rate component to ensure sufficient revenue for public safety purposes. One of the ways suggested to decrease this inequity is the use of irrigation meters. This would take a long time to implement so another suggestion from Len was to have a high seasonal rate that would capture irrigation. The only potential problem with that is if the town relied too heavily on seasonal income and there was a rainy summer of a severe water ban. Paul suggested that the rates had to account for essential versus non-essential water use. Eric feels that ascending blocks do not address the issue of conservation since a household of one, even if it doesn’t do any conservation couldn’t use enough water to go into another block. The question of what constitutes subsistence use was brought up by David C. and it can’t really be answered because it’s different for every household. There was further discussion with Eric saying that currently the rates cover operating costs and maintenance but do not cover infrastructure costs or environmental costs such as storm water treatment. Paul stated that he would like to increase the current rates while leaving the current blocks in place. Eric felt this would not be an incentive for conservation for the smaller households. Len felt that the base rate should definitely provide for fire protection. He suggested there could be relatively small differences between rates but a fairly aggressive block structure. If seasonal rates remain there should be flatter blocks and a higher seasonal differential than is currently used.
When Selectmen Powell asked how soon there could be a transition to a structure that aimed toward a single rate, Dave C. suggested that the WMAC was looking at a 3-5 year time frame. Len asked that the Selectmen (acting as the water commissioners )let the committee know if they are in agreement that the rate structure should change to account for the inequity that a majority of the WMAC feels exists. Once WMAC has an answer, it can decide on how to proceed. How rates would change if there were a borrowing was also discussed.
Paul stated that he felt there was no urgency to change and he wanted to wait until the results of the last rate increase could be analyzed. Dave H. felt that since inequity currently exists, rates should be addressed on an annual basis. Ian Cooke suggested that a high base rate would discourage conservation.
Dave H. also asked the Selectmen how much input, if any, they wanted from WMAC on the water department capital budget. Both selectmen asked the committee to submit advice on the capital budget.
Dave H. gave his version of what a 5 year transition could look like. He explained that he was keeping the revenue constant and that the chart was modeled on residential single family homes. Paul questioned where the 2.4 M revenue figure came from and Dave said he took it from a previous document that the WMAC had been given. Discussion then followed on how to treat multi-family, subsidized housing, irrigation etc.(spreadsheet attached)
Dave C. suggested giving the Selectmen until the end of the year to get back to the committee and Eric said that he would submit his 5 year plan for capital improvements to the Selectmen. This plan would look at the top priorities from the spreadsheet that was derived from projects in the Master Plan. Eric said he then melds the water projects with proposed street projects. Eric’s plan is based on about 1.5 M. He stressed that the plan was not carved in stone since emergency items could come up.
The next meeting is scheduled for January 19, 2012.
Adjournment at 9:50PM.
Respectfully submitted
Anne Carney, Acting Clerk