HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-04 Water and Sewer Advisory Committee MinutesWATER, SEWER AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
February 4, 2004
A meeting of the Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee
(WSSWMAQ was held at 7:50 PM on Wednesday, February 4, 2004, in the Lower Conference
Room, Reading Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA.
In attendance were Chairman Richard Moore, Secretary Stephen Crook, Committee members
John Wood, and Jennifer Lachmayr, Board of Selectmen Liaison Gail Wood, Town Engineer Joe
Delaney and DPW Director Ted McIntire.
Storm Water Management Plan
Joe Delaney indicated that one of the minimum control measures is public education and
outreach and he recommended that a report be made to April 2004 Annual Town Meeting on the
findings and recommendations of the Ad-hoc Storm Water Management Advisory Committee.
Joe would be willing to give that report. Following discussion, it was moved by Jennifer
Lachmayr, seconded by John Wood and approved by a vote of 4-0 to present a report to Town
Meeting in April 2004 on the recommendations of the Ad-hoc Storm Water Management
Advisory Committee including the financial portion of the program.
The Committee identified the following options for funding the Storm Water Management
program.
Option 1: General Fund
Pros: 1. Fully tax deductible
2. Minor additional administration costs
3. Potential flexibility within the present bottom line of the
general DPW Budget
4. Do not have to evaluate costs - now used as management
practice
Cons: 1. Subject to conflicting priorities to appropriations from
limited funding
2. May not allow minimum compliance
Option 2: Use of Existing Enterprise Fund
Pros: 1. Budgetary flexibility due to no conflicting priorities
2. Funded by fees
3. Existing enterprise system
4. Minor increase in administration costs
5. Dedicated funding
6. Easy to administrate
Cons: 1. Not fully tax deductible
Minutes - WSAC February 4, 2004.doc
Page 1 of 3
2. Rate is based on water use
3. Facilities on septic systems or out of Town users of
Reading water but not on sewer would not get charged
4. This type of user fee is not equitable
Option 2A: Variable of Option 2
The Town would have the ability to develop a fee based on other than water use.
Option 3: Storm Water Utility - New Enterprise Fund
Pros: 1. Dedicated source of funding
2. More equitable - fee based on percentage of impervious
area of a property
3. Separate enterprise raises the accountability
Cons: 1. Additional bureaucracy and administrative costs
2. Less flexibility in budgeting
3. Funding methodology could have more development costs
4. Could develop something similar to a "Storm Water Board
of Assessors" to review changes in impervious areas of
each lot in Town
Option 4: Hybrid
Pros: 1.
Phased Enterprise Fund
2.
Quicker, easier implementation
3.
Some costs are tax deductible
4.
Partial dedicated funding
5.
Incorporates additional flexibility
6.
Shares the funding flexibility
7.
Moderate administrative costs
Cons: 1.
Collection costs are more than moderate
2.
Public perception of a program that grows over time,
potentially out of control
3.
May require large amount of education
4.
Partial dedicated source of funds
There is a need to identify what the Town is doing now and at what costs to perform Storm
Water Management tasks.
Joe will develop the presentation to be made at the April 2004 Town Meeting. Joe and Ted will
meet with Town Accountant Richard Foley and Finance Director Beth Klepeis to get their advise
on the development of an enterprise system. Beth and Richard will be invited to the next Water,
Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee meeting. Ted will put together the
present costs of performing Storm Water Management tasks.
Minutes - WSAC February 4, 2004.doc
Page 2 of 3