Browse
Search
Minutes - 20020516
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
2000's
>
2002
>
Minutes - 20020516
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2008 4:49:20 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 2:01:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/16/2002
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ed Kerwin: Not at all. In fact, last fall we closed on a $35 million revenue band and we enjoyed a <br />very favorable AA+ rating. <br />Barry had also asked about one of our fees. Our connection fee, something akin to a capacity <br />charge or connecting charge, far asingle-family home our fee is based on square footage. And far a smaller <br />home, that can be quite large. What we did is we looked at homes built a certain year and then we looked at, <br />"OK, they've been customers of ours now for two ar three years. Is there a relationship between how much <br />water people use and the size of the home?" And what we found is there is a fairly strong predictable <br />relationship that smaller homes use less water than larger homes. So we designed a connection fee, or an <br />availability fee where smaller homes pay less than larger homes. Now, fees aren't cheap, they are based on <br />what it actually casts us. Far instance, a home that is 1,300 square feet or less, the water connection fee is <br />$700. If the home has 3,800 square feet, it takes $4,300 for that same connection. That's quite a spread. <br />Chair Jacobs: And it's revenue neutral for you. <br />Ed Kerwin: It is, it's based on cost of service. It wasn't subsidizing for a certain class of <br />customers. It's worked out well, and again, we're happy to share what we did with anyone if that's of interest. <br />Chair Jacobs: And just let me add that I particularly asked that question because we read about <br />the concerns about trying to provide service to those who are least able to pay, this is a defensible way to <br />help them hook an to the systems. And so we wanted to make sure that OWASA shared that information. <br />Thank you. <br />Robert Wilson: Barry, they didn't consider in any assessments other than just the cast of that <br />water line. You don't have a right for assessments do you? <br />Ed Kerwin: No, our board can assess. What I think I heard your policy is that the benefiting party <br />pays the full cost. For instance, if there's an unsewered neighborhood that wants public sewer, we can <br />assess them and make that improvement. Although the two towns do contribute, I think Chapel Hill, for <br />instance, will contribute up to $4,500 in an assessment project to help defer the cost to encourage people to <br />get off septic tanks and hook to the public system. The OWASA board is empowered to do the assessment. <br />In fact, our most recent one was putting in five hydrants in the ??wood subdivision on 54 west. That's a very <br />small project, and those folks have been assessed, and their savings in their homeowners insurance for <br />having fire hydrants will pay the $25 assessment back in one year. <br />Terry Roland: Do you have a fixed fee, availability fee ar something that is right off the tap before <br />you charge for per gallon of water? <br />Ed Kerwin: Yes, we have a monthly service fee and then the commodity charge. The monthly <br />service fee for sewer and a commodity charge. There wasn't any change in the sewer side, nor was there a <br />cap placed on sewer. It's just the commodity charge for water. <br />Terry Roland: Is that fee variable depending on the size of the meter? <br />Ed Kerwin: Yes. <br />Chair Jacobs: Since we are running a little ahead of schedule, I thought we might ask Chatham <br />County to take the opportunity to share its concerns and I'll recognize Commissioner Pollard. I know she has <br />some staff members here. <br />F. Chatham County -Commissioner Maraaret Pollard <br />Yes I do, and I'm sure Ron Singleton our Public Works Director will carry forth for us. But there <br />are a couple of things, and I'm sure Commissioner Bob Atwater will have comments as well. I would like to <br />mention just a couple of things that are policy issues that concern the board and I think we've made some <br />progress toward and that is that right now we are in the middle of refining our land conservation and <br />development plan, and there is a plan to tie our water policy and our land use policy in same reasonable way. <br />The other thing, I think we really have paid close attention and will be paying even closer attention to the <br />protection of the watershed. That's been on our agenda for a number of years, and there was discussion last <br />year that this year we would have an Erosion Control Officer, because I think that really does determine to a <br />large extent, erosion control determines to a large extent the water quality. But since the budget situation is <br />such, I'm not sure that we'll be able to carry forth with this goal this year or not, but that's certainly in our <br />plans. But I think one of the most important things that Chatham County has done to bring ourselves inline <br />with meeting our water supply needs was the hiring of Ran Singleton who really has provided staff leadership <br />to our water board as well as the Commissioners in helping us to think through some of the issues of water <br />supply and distribution that I think that's got us to the point where we are now. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.