|
This response represents my views only.
When I took office in December of 1998, I soon became
appalled at the financial status of the county's water and sewer enterprise
fund. The fund was operating at a $1 million loss every year and no one
seemed to care. We were charging less for water and sewer than what it cost
to provide the service. We were not putting any money aside for the eventual
repair, renovation and replacement of our water and sewer systems. We were
allowing developers to connect to the system for less than what it cost to
make new connections available. Through a Rube Goldberg-like scheme known as
"tap credits," a lot of developers got back a substantial amount of
what little they did pay for new connections. Prior boards of county
commissioners were content to ignore the situation.
We instituted a comprehensive review of our water and
sewer enterprise fund. We had numerous televised public worksessions on the
issue. We also had not one but two advertised and televised public
hearings. The issue also received front-page coverage in the local
newspapers.
At the conclusion of our review and after considering
public input, we implemented the following measures:
- We now charge developers $6,000, rather than $2,200 to
connect a new house or its commercial equivalent to the sewer system;
- We now charge developers $4,300, rather than $2,200 to
connect a new house or its commercial equivalent to the water system;
- We eliminated the practice of giving developers
"tap credits"; and
- We increased the rates for existing customers in order
to raise enough revenue to:
·
cover the cost of providing the service; and
·
begin setting aside funds for the eventual repair, replacement
and renovation of the water and sewer system.
I fully supported and voted for the first three (3)
measures. While I also supported the increases in fees for existing
customers, I did not vote for them. I wanted to place an accounting
"Chinese Wall" around revenues generated from existing customers in
order to prevent those revenues from being used to finance the enlargement,
expansion, or extension of the system for developers. A majority of the
county commissioners favor the use of public funds and public debt to build
water and sewer projects for developers.
The only thing worse than a public utility that charges
too much for its services is one that charges too little. We have a duty to
set rates at levels sufficient to maintain the system over the long term. To
do otherwise simply postpones the day of reckoning to future generations.
Lennie Thompson
|