Dissolved Debt

Next week figures to be wet and wild for Port St. Joe city commissioners.

On Tuesday, the commission will hold a public hearing regarding a potential rate increase for water and sewer users – which at this point is much all the south end of the county, from Overstreet to St. Joseph Peninsula to White City to Highland View.

A study commissioned by city commissioners sets out a strong case that the city is undercharging for water and sewer.

In some part, the utility rate study by Burton and Associates was undertaken to quiet the rabble from the county commission meeting room where several commissioners, in particular Bill Williams, have made considerable hay about the city’s current rates and the lack of any study to substantiate them.

This might come back to bite Mr. Williams and his constituents where they sit as the rate study spotlights that compared to costs, the city is ripping itself off in terms of charging consumers for water and sewer.

And in an era of ever-shrinking budgets and revenue, this is no small issue. Establishing a proper pass-through charge for the costs of producing the water and sewer consumers use is essential for the fiscal health of the city, and in turn its taxpayers.

What the Burton study illustrated is that taxpayers have borne far more of the burden than consumers in building a state-of-the-art water plant, upgrading the wastewater plant, a slew of infrastructure projects and proposed new headworks and sprayfields.

But commissioners run into a serious perception issue despite the logic behind increasing rates – nearly doubling them over a three-year cycle.

The first dates to the planning and design for the new city water plant as well as the myriad infrastructure projects the city took upon its shoulders as part of the tax grab to annex WindMark Beach well ahead of any substantial property tax benefit that development will offer.

At the time the commission – and to note, none of the current commissioners were on the board – was planning this plant, the assurance was made that none of this upgrade in either water or sewer plants would impact consumers.

Despite repeated assurances from city engineers and several commissioners that the city was not biting off anything that a few large grants could not digest, former Commissioner Bennie Roberts repeatedly sounded a voice of skepticism.

Over and over, Roberts insisted that consumers would end up footing too much of the bill for the plant and infrastructure and Roberts were repeatedly rebuffed by his fellow commissioners who were clearly wearing proverbial rose-colored glasses.

Not only have consumers seen an uptick in water and sewer bills, the entire imbroglio that led to the rate study centered on bills that were going up by 20 and 30 percent outside the city limits.

As a consumer, my water/sewer bill, which was $40-$60 in 2001-02, is now consistently around $90 a month.

But the larger problem – folks in Gulf County are all too familiar with pledges not kept – is what has happened since the plant has come online.

For starters, the water plant has frequently exceeded testing guidelines for a potentially dangerous chemical and the city and Florida Department of Environmental Protection entered into a consent decree which effectively puts the city on notice that there are problems that must be addressed post haste.

Most significant to consumers, though, is what is coming out of many taps - reddish and odiferous water that has made many blanch at the thought of consumption.

Dishwashers have been discolored on the inside. Parents draw baths for children and drain the water based on discoloration.

Water for tea is not rendered drinkable even with heavy doses of sugar and lemons, at least one citizen attested during a recent meeting.

Clothes, towels and wash rags become discolored over time in some areas of town and the city embarked on an ambitious pipe flushing program in an attempt to rectify a situation that will only be solved by millions of dollars to replace 20 miles of pipe.

In sum, in many areas where the city supplies water and sewer service, some folks would question from which source the water coming from their tap emerged.

So, now, commissioners are preparing to ask many of the same consumers who complained the loudest about the stench and color of their water – generally folks living in the city proper and many of whom are seniors and/or on fixed incomes – to shoulder water/sewer rate increases of at least 20 percent or more over a three-year period.

Mayor Mel Magidson may have captured the situation perfectly during a recent budget workshop when he stated he would not vote for a property tax increase, in large part because the city was preparing to hike utility rates next month.

Commissioners have a solid factual case for such a hike. They contracted the rate study to silent critics of the current rates only to discover, based on a thorough review by a reputable firm with much experience in such studies, that the city is undercharging for water and sewer.

But many consumers in and outside the city might argue that the commissioners have vastly over-taxed their patience with the ongoing issues with the water.

Certainly, the city could have used better insight and foresight from the experts advising them concerning what would happen when its new $21 million plant, using surface water rather than deepwater well water, started pumping water through pipes that are nearly of Great Depression era.

A better understanding of how surface water is different chemically than well water, how that difference would impact treatment options and how those options would impact aging infrastructure would have been helpful.

But the bottom line is the city is facing a fiscal reality eclipsed by a public relations disaster.

Commissioners are likely to find that out, loudly, on Tuesday.