Drilling Down on Municipal Water

Revised December 11, 2024

WATCH for the SCA series on the state of water, coming in 2025.

On 11/25/2024 the Shorewood council hashed over the ongoing dilemma of the underwater municipal water fund. It discussed incentives for residents, who have existing “stubs” to connect to the municipal water system. The council also laid out some ideas for a more “mandatory” approach.

For background, the city water fund is considered an “enterprise fund” and is currently operating in the red. This is equal to a business operating at a loss. The council’s challenge is to figure a way to make the fund flush.

Municipal water pipes installed on Smithtown Road, Eureka north and Wedgewood Drive between 1995 and 2006, resulted in a $5k-$10k assessment to adjoining property owners. Those assessments were paid in a lump sum, or financed by the city over five years.

Sometime around 2018-19, the mandatory assessment was stopped, even though the water pipe was added with roadway projects (Woodside, Glen-Amlee, Strawberry and Birch Bluff). Along with that, there was no requirement to connect to the water service. Not charging the assessment for putting the pipe in the ground violates the city’s water ordinance. It could be argued that this contributes, in part, to today’s deficit.

Fifteen hundred homes are now connected to municipal water; approximately 500 homes have water stubbed to their property but have chosen not to connect. Water connection fees were paid in those projects up to 2006 though many have not connected.

The connection fee has been $10k since the mid-90s. In recent projects, the actual cost to connect to the stub is about $17k. Bringing the pipe from the curb into the home and the indoor plumbing needed are the variables. Consumption charges are above and beyond the connection fee.

First 5,000 gallons: 5,001–50,000 gallons: $4.99 per 1,000 gallons

Over 50,000 gallons: Water meters are read every quarter

$29.55 per quarter

$7.17 per 1,000 gallons

Water meters are read every quarter.

The council agreed that the challenge to “selling” the residents on hook-up, are the many nuances involved with each unique property. The city cannot forecast what it may cost to go from the property line into the house. Residents report municipal water hookup to be an awkward, confusing process.

“We lose them on the first question which is ‘how much?’…and we’re like we don’t know…in your memo [engineer’s memo] you say it could be from $6k to $69k…who’s going to answer ‘yes’ when they get that?”

– Councilmember Zerby

Examples of cost variables:

Distance from curb to house hook-up can be from 30 to 200 feet*
Method of laying the pipe can be by boring or trenching.
Interior plumbing may not be up to code requiring updating.

*numbers are approximate

The city engineer proposed that staff and council develop a questionnaire to send only to the 500 who have access to water. This mailing would spell out the minimum $10k and cost per foot to get to the house is xx. This could also be a means to educate residents on the benefits of municipal water. Any residents showing interest in connecting, would be contacted by city staff to discuss the process, get an approximate cost and review steps to their specific connection.

The mayor stated she is concerned that a questionnaire could be weaponized against the council and staff and, this may not be the proper method for this community.

Part of the communication with residents would spell out the advantages to connecting:

Water service is uninterrupted during power outages
Aging wells typically have a higher risk of catastrophic failure
Keep private wells for irrigation or outdoor use
Avoid contaminants such as arsenic, nitrates, coliform
Better overall water quality
Existing in-home treatments systems would still be used for muni water
Avoid increases in connection fee
Possibility of some city financial assistance, via assessment

Other ideas suggested by council members were that would be advantageous to the homeowner:

A form of rebate program as an incentive.
Retaining a reliable contractor for all connections for a volume discount
The city does the “leg work” with the contractors to determine a price to install.*
Consider partnering with a water testing firm for private wells to take one step out of the process.*Bolton & Menk’s charge for doing the individual analysis would be about 30-40% of the construction cost per property.

Several ideas for the “stick” approach were also discussed:

When a private well fails, city water connection is mandated
Dramatically increasing the hook-up fee over the next few years.
Adding a water access fee to the utility bill for those with access not connected.
Mandatory connection at the time of sale or subdivision.

Sanschagrin said he has talked with residents who are interested but find the process overwhelming. He suggested a public forum. Labadie said he should bring those residents in to talk to the council. She also said the city is not ready for a public forum.

Staff projected connection charges could be $6k-$69k. Zerby noted that the largest question is the cost and if that cannot be answered with accuracy, it is a no go. The outcome of the meeting was to direct the staff to compile a draft educational communication/questionnaire for the council to review at a future work session.