WCSC MEETING 030924 Minutes - revisedrevised Page 1 of 2 3/4/04
Wastewater Cost Study Committee
Minutes of September 24, 2003
Members present Robert Smallidge, Charlie Pugh, Jim Bright, Brian Pollard, Bob Cawley, Anne Funderburk, George Peckham, Ted Bromage and Jim Robinson
Excused: Edith Dunham, Kathy Branch,
Public present Mike MacDonald
Called to order 6:48pm
II Minutes
Motion to accept minutes of 10 September moved by Charlie, second by Anne , passed unanimous
Motion to accept minutes of 19 September, second, passed unanimous
Table acceptance of minutes until next meeting in order to include reference to Memorandum from Erik Stumpfel of Eaton Peabody, motion Ted B., Anne second, unanimous.
Jim Robinson distributed a revised financial analysis detailing who is connected and who is not. Jim indicated that the data is estimated to be within 1% accuracy.
III Review and Discuss Effects of The Legal Opinion On Funding Proposals.
Some committee members have submitted revised proposals based on the information developed by Attorney Stumpfel. Brian P took wells out of the formula, limiting any proposal to just septic systems. Payments for retroactive costs also limited, because of difficulty of calculation. Limiting reimbursement to O & M only. Yarmouth proposal is only a one-year proposal. Brian also suggested mandating yearly maintenance. Proposed payments be made when septic systems need maintenance and pay contractor directly for repairs. Value to septic system owners would be approximately half. Anne asks how the town budgets for this. Brian suggests using estimates and then budgeting. Bob Cawley suggests reserve accounts. George P commented on Stumpfel’s presentation.
Charlie detailed his changes to his proposal. George points out that payments would be made with funds raised through taxation. Anne suggested a combination of rural support and a fixture count fee based.
IV Discuss Philosophical IssuesRelating To The Funding Proposals.
Charlie offered three issues, 1. To what extent it is appropriate to rely on the high-value properties to fund town services. Charlie feels that the town should continue to encourage the continuation of year-round residents and feels that the high-value properties continue to fund the majority of the services. Jim R. supports the concept, as did Brian Pollard and Bob Cawley . Brian moved that the primary funding proposal should be based on the town budget and property tax, George seconded. Motion to table opposed by George P.
Charlie’s second issue is it appropriate to have someone pay for services they do not have access to? Charlie does not think it is fair. Anne agrees that it is not fair, but how do we do it. Ted would like to have things fair, Ted states there is a degree of fairness. Anne we do something moving toward fair. Any system we develop will be fairer than what currently exists. Discussed and agreed in general that it is not appropriate to people to pay for service for which they do not have access, moved by Charlie, second by George, motion tabled, vote unanimous.
Third is it ever appropriate for people to pay for services they receive in order to accomplish an identified objective, i.e. pay for trash, reduces waste disposal costs and increases recycling rates. We discussed and agreed there are times when it is appropriate to have a fee for services rather than paid for through taxation, moved by Charlie, second by Bob C. tabled with unanimous motion.
V Review And Discuss The Use Of Evaluation Points, Or Other Means For Rating Funding Proposals By Committee Members.
Jim Robinson suggested that with the general acceptance of the philosophical issues above that we could select proposals for detailed study without the need of using evaluation points.
VI Determine Data Needed To Estimate Likely Costs Associated With The Various Proposals For Funding Wastewater Treatment.
Mike MacDonald will provide Jim R. with information to allow determination of “homestead” property data for use in calculations.
VII Discuss Need For Setting Dates For Future Meetings So That The Committee Can Have A Recommendation Before The BOS By Their First Meeting In December.
Bob S. suggested that it would be desirable to cull the list of wastewater funding proposals by October 8, because that is the only meeting in the next several weeks when all active Committee members could be present. He asked if it would be desirable to meet during the week of 29 Setember to accomplish this. It was suggested that we should be able to accomplish that goal at the 8 October meeting if the Committee agreed to stay until that was accomplished.
VIII Date For The Next Meeting.
Next meeting October 8, 2003 6:45pm at the Meeting Hall Northeast Harbor.
Motion for adjournment by Anne, second by Charlie, vote unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael MacDonald
| 