TOWN CENTER SEWER ACTION GROUP
A Sub-Committee of The Harvard Board of Selectmen
Meeting Minutes Thursday February 19, 2009
Meeting called to order @ 8:05AM at Hapgood room
Attendees: Chris Ashley, Joe Sudol, Carrie Fraser, Wade Holtzman, Pat Jennings, Mark Lanza, town legal counsel
Meeting Summary
Old Business
New Business
“In district” Outreach Program/Participation Survey
The approach will be to recruit and “train” a group of town center residents to help with outreach. The goal is to prepare training and train them by end of February
The model has been updated to reflect assumptions in the draft by-law around betterments and fees.
Legal Constraints and advice per Mark Lanza
Mark recommends a special act/legislation. If this passes with support from the town can take 3-4 months (with no opposition) or up to a year (with opposition) to pass through the state legislative process.
Reasons:
1) can pass through better interest rates on the betterment
2) can spread the betterments out over more than 20 years
3) can defer payments for certain special cases
4) can make the district growth neutral, avoiding the issue of creating more potential for growth and development. You can for example say that you can only tie in if you could have put in a title V solution or that the intensity of use cannot change, or tie-in can be declined based on capacity limits
Without a special act, our choices for establishing governance over a sewer district are:
1) establish under state law – with elected commissioners who have power to establish a district and rates
2) establish with the selectmen governing and with the same powers
Mark recommends two votes for town meeting from a legal perspective:
1) Article to authorize a state legislation petition for a special act.
2) Article to borrow the money to do the project
Recommends an appointed governing body with a certain composition to be written into the special act. We can leverage the work already done on the special act drafted for Still River.
Other comments from Mark:
o Standard betterment approaches: are “arcane” per Mark. Only approaches are uniform unit and uniform rate (based on frontage or square footage of property). Group has already rejected uniform rate, but uniform unit is very limiting and each property would have to be assigned the same betterment: one unit. So the General Store and churches would pay the same as a house, for example
o The flow meters should be put on the output side into the sewer per Mark to avoid questions about fairness of billing
o Mark reminded us that the town would be the single largest user of the sewer infrastructure and not immune to betterment and usage fees.
o Once the sewer commission is in place it operates like a utility (business) and must be kept in the black. It is highly unlikely that it will run in the red.
o Connection fees are essential.
o The town can re-capture some of the initial capital costs of building the plant because you are extending the capital infrastructure to more users. This would be done via a sewer privilege fee which flows into the sewer fund. The funds in should be put into a reserve account and O&M should be used to make improvements. The sewer connection fees and privilege fees can be reserved for the purpose of improvements.
Q&A
Q: How do we handle changes in use for a property and limit growth?
A: The special act can provide for this scenario by either saying that the property needs to prove that a Title V system with the new capacity must be proved feasible or saying that growth in use is subject to capacity ceiling.
Q: You cannot charge the betterment fee for a period of time after construction?
A: Within 6 months of completion, the betterment must be assessed. But the betterment might be assessed earlier via an estimate for very large and long duration projects. Mark recommends doing it once for this size of project
Q: If the town wants to reserve capacity how do you protect that from unexpected connectors?
A: Without a special act, there is a statutory right to connect. The special act can limit this right based on capacity constraints. It also limits the boundaries of the district.
Q: If someone chooses not to tie in now, can they be precluded from doing that? Do we have to reserve the capacity for their future tie-in?
A: Mark has never seen a time limit on connection. Capacity usually addresses constraints.
Capacity: is an issue that will come up repeatedly. It is important to try to get as definite a read from the DEP on whether capacity based on Title V or capacity based on actual usage is how the permit will be interpreted.
Next steps:
o Recommend a special legislation approval and a warrant article to fund the project.
o Mark has drafted a special act for Still River but would need direction as to what should be included regarding key provisions. E.g. governing body, terms, etc. Could come up with a draft within a couple of weeks.
o No legal requirements for public hearings but they are recommended.
Critical Path – Timeline to Town Meeting
¨ Unknowns that need resolution for draft warrant
¨ Public outreach period: end of February through mid-March. Dependencies: O&M charges, betterment charges
¨ By-law to create a district requires a public hearing, which needs to be advertised on March 2nd
¨ Home rule petition (special legislation) needed to modify terms and reduce interest payments. This is optional but we need to understand the timeline for this.
¨ February 23rd selectmen meeting: review draft warrant summary outline with selectmen
¨ Populate draft warrant content by mid-March
¨ Draft warrant articles due in March (need date), go to print April 2nd
¨ Town Meeting May 2
Meet with DEP
Most important need for this meeting is to understand requirements for a sewer extension and to understand status of state revolving fund. Also to seek input, guidance, technical assistance on legal/regulatory parameters including home rule petition, district creation bylaw, structuring and approval of betterments. Scheduled for next week
Meeting on financing alternatives
Not yet scheduled
Future meetings:
Proposed meetings: February 26, March 5 at 8am, March 3 for the first public hearing
Actions from last time:
¨ Joe to provide a timeline for by-law development and public hearings by the next meeting - done
¨ Chris to ask DEP for guidance on items – in progress
¨ Carrie to improve O&M details in model and add massaging around possible and caps and subscription rate - done
¨ Carrie to set up meetings for February 12, February 19 at 8am - done
Actions:
¨ Chris to meet with Selectmen and brief them on list of actions
¨ Carrie to update model to remove grinder pumps from capital costs, and add them back in to taxpayer and private costs sections (they cannot be viewed as betterments)
¨ Carrie to update the model to assume a connection fee, amount TBD
¨ Carrie to update the model to assume grinder pump financing terms and leave in the assumption of 20 year financing for capital project and betterment payback
¨ Pat and Wade to start work for public meeting
The meeting was adjourned at 10:32 am
Minutes recorded and submitted by Carrie Fraser - secretary, TCSAG
Accepted by the TCSAG February xx, 2009
| 
