.
Feedback

Why Sewer Costs Are Double Water Costs

Understanding Your Sewer Rates – A Short History

By now, everyone should have paid their quarterly Sewer bill.  Since it came at the same time as the quarterly water bill from New London, most Waterford sewer customers probably noticed that their sewer bill was around twice the size of the water bill.  I will try to explain just how we got to this place over the past eight or so years.

Prior to FY2004 the Waterford Utility Commission (WUC) was merging connection fees and annual sewer fees into one fund.  Using connection fees to fund the daily operations of the sewer system helped keep user rates exceptionally low.  In 2004 the WUC was informed that connection fees could not be used for operations but should be placed a a special maintenance fund to support future repair and maintenance of the sewer system.  During this period, the Waterford Board of Finance (BOF) and the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) were also encouraging the WUC to become independent of the taxpayer and more reliant on the rate payer.

Before a review of the sewer rates over the previous five years it is worth the time to determine what makes up the enterprise fund budget.  The largest expense in the budget is the fee charged by the Piacenti Regional Treatment Plant in New London operated by VEOLIA Water, Inc. under contract to the New London Water Pollution Control Authority.  In FY2010 that fee was $1,341,842.  The FY2011 budget is $1.5 million. The  fee is based on the nearly one billion gallons of effluent that flow into the treatment plant from Waterford as a percentage of the total effluent treated by the plant annually.  In an effort to reduce this amount, the WUC has embarked in a lengthy project to find unauthorized sewer connections such as gutter drains and sump pump discharges and checking the actual piping for leakage.  This is referred to as Infiltration and Inflow (I/I).  The aim is to reduced I/I to as low as possible..  The upgrading of the pump stations will also reduce the “foreign” effluent introduced to the Sewer System.

 The next large expense is salaries and fringe benefits for the fifteen employees of the WUC.  It was $1,099,832 in FY2010 and the FY2011 budget is $1,177,717.  In an effort to be more independent of the town taxpayer, the WUC also commenced in FY2011 not to request any budget from the town but rather fund all operating expenses through the Enterprise Fund.  This eliminated approximately $50,000 from the Town’s budget for FY2011 with the same expected in FY2012.  By State Statute and by Waterford Ordinance, the Taxpayer is still expected to fund any capital expenses beyond the abilities of the Sewer Maintenance Fund.

In 2006 the Sewer Rate was a flat $225 per year for each residence and $3.65/1000 Gal for Commercial.  According to the FY2006 Financial Report, at the end of FY2006 (June 30, 2006) the enterprise fund reported a loss of $1,658,678 which was made up by the transfers from the general fund to insure that all the bills were paid on time.  After holding a public hearing, the WUC recommended to the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) in December 2006 to increase the rate to $235 per year for residential and $3.95/1000 Gal for commercial users.  Despite this increase on June 30, 2007 the Enterprise Fund reported a loss of $2,046,775  In December 2007, the WUC requested a rate increase to $312 per year for residential and $5.25/1000 Gal for commercial users.  The billing cycle changed from semiannual to quarterly starting in January 2008.  The June 30, 2008 loss was $1,132,597.  These steady increases in rates were becoming difficult for the single home owner, especially the senior citizens who believed they should not have to pay as much as the growing family of five or six for their sewer usage.

Under pressure from rate payers and the RTM, the WUC began to investigate billing by consumption. One of the hold ups in this effort was the inability to get accurate water consumption data from the New London Water system due to incompatibility of the software systems and the way that the New London contractor mixed New London and Waterford users.  When the New London system contract operator changed to VEOLIA Water, Inc. the opportunity to get this information appeared.  During the fall of 2008, the WUC and VEOLIA commenced testing a linkage to share customer usage information.  In December 2008 the WUC proposed an increase in sewer rates to $407 per year for residential and $6.85/1000 gal for commercial customers.  This proposal was rejected by the RTM after a contentious discussion.   The WUC returned in February 2009 with a proposed residential increase to $385 per year and a commercial rate of $6.50 per 1000 Gal with a minimum rate of $494 per year.  The rates would only be effective until June 30, 2009 when billing by consumption would take effect.

In August 2009 the RTM approved the request of the WUC to shift to a hybrid billing by consumption with a Tier 1 fixed charge of $180 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit and a Tier II Water Consumption Charge of $3.50 per 100 cubic feet.  Users would be billed quarterly ($45 per quarter for Tier 1) plus the quarterly usage. as determined by the quarterly water consumption from the New London Water System. Special rules were established for sewer users that had well water rather than New London Water and procedures were established to permit rate payers who used significant water for gardening, filling swimming pools, washing cars, etc. to install secondary meters to reduce their sewer bills.

The Tier I charge is a fixed charge that is approximately 40% of the Enterprise fund budget which is considered by the WUC to be the amount that the WUC would need to operate regardless of the number of users in the system.  The remaining 60% is related to the actual effluent treated by the New London Treatment Plant and the piping and pumps required to get the effluent to the Treatment plant.

This change in rate increased the bills of heavy water users but did not reduce the bills of the single resident sufficiently according to the many senior citizens and other single persons who appealed to RTM members for relief.  At its December 2010 meeting, the RTM voted to ask the WUC to revaluate its sewer rates with the goal of reducing the fixed charge and moving toward a more complete “billing by consumption.”  This move will increase the rates for large residential users.  It will probably reduce rates for commercial customers and low water consumers.

If a rate payer has a sudden increase in the sewer bill due to water leakage or some other event not under the control of the rate payer, the WUC has been very reasonable in adjusting the rates and payment schedules for those users.  They also are quick to place a lien on any home or business that  does not pay on time or contact the WUC to make payment arrangements.

In summary, to reduce your sewer bill the key is use less water for washing, dishes, bathing, etc. The WUC is working to get any unnecessary water from the sewer piping to reduce the treatment fees.  This will also reduce the rates required by sewer plant users.  In the long run, these actions by both the WUC and the ratepayer will work to reduce the charges paid by the ratepayer.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 05:57 am
There is no "suckles away". The money is deposited by those that use it. The rest isRead More relentless retoric...
Daniella Ruiz May 19, 2013 at 05:44 am
another 'not for profit' that suckles away at the very core of peoples generosity?? better toRead More 'retire' the banking/WS thieves that casually gore the system with relentless greed, schemes and secrecy.
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:05 pm
Oh, and please spread the word, and bring a friend to the meeting! :)
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:03 pm
Hi Naty! That would be so great! The next RTM meeting in Waterford is on June 3rd, at 7:00 p.m.Read More The more people who show up and tell the town we want Cohanzie School to be repurposed, the better! This is politics, after all, and it is the residents showing up and telling the town this is a building we care about, this is a property we want access too. Imagine at least the 1923 section being repurposed into some department that would benefit the town. The town will demolish Cohanzie, sell the land and the bricks, and turn around in a year or two and say "We need more space! Let's build a new building!". Why should we do that when Cohanzie School is there, it can be repurposed, and it is so important for our town's history and the Cohanzie community? What if there was a park area where the basketball courts are, a path to walk around the building and down a part of the hill. Sledding could still happen, ball playing or other activities on the lower level. This retains the historic building, the architecture, the Cohanzie name, the community "presence", the hill, the ball field. It can be a place to go and relax. Even a dog park can be built on part of it! There is nothing like that in that section of town. Leary Field is remote and isolated. It is a ball field. With Cohanzie Firehouse and Lisa Dedrick Field right there, you feel the presence of community, without being isolated or unable to grab a quiet moment or more. Come on Waterford. This building and grounds belongs to us. Let's reclaim it before it is demolished and the bricks sold. Don't believe it cannot be repurposed. Asbestos, oil tanks, and other environmental factors are ALWAYS present in old schools, so the experts have told me. Old schools are repurposed all the time. It is a matter of convincing the town officials that this is what we WANT. Please speak up! Please SHOW UP, at the RTM meeting on June 3rd, at the Town Hall at 7:00 p.m. They are waiting to see what kind of turnout we get. Ignoring one resident or twenty is easy. Ignoring 100 or 500 is hard. We can do this, if you HELP.
Naty Bush May 18, 2013 at 11:44 am
Where will the meeting take place? I might be able to go to say why it shouldn't be demolished.
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !