Board hears plan to shore up drinking water; Pamunkey intake, Brickshire tank and rate options discussed

Mr. Lane briefed the New Kent County Board of Supervisors on drinking-water capital improvement priorities at the Aug. 11 meeting, saying the county faces infrastructure limits that could produce outages or mandatory conservation without near-term projects and financing. "We are already experiencing low water pressure in the Brickshire area during the peak demand times," he said.

The presentation laid out immediate needs and longer-term options. Staff and consultants proposed funding carry-forward projects (~$24.5 million), about $2 million of FY26 CIP work, a Brickshire storage tank estimated at $10.25 million and an optional New Kent Highway waterline estimated at $5.5 million. Dan Voigt and Davenport consultants modeled two financing scenarios: borrow only for the Brickshire tank or borrow larger amounts to maintain a 50% unrestricted cash policy. "If we limit the debt issuance ... we would need about another $7.2 million of cash brought into the system," Voigt said. He also presented combined scenarios that include New Kent Highway.

Why it matters: county staff said regulators are limiting groundwater allocations and the county lacks the tanks and interconnections to move existing water to meet growth. Mr. Lane told the board, "DEQ will be reducing our groundwater permits in 2038 to levels that do not meet today's needs." County administrator Mr. Hathaway later noted the county's 15-year withdrawal permit issued in 2018 runs to about 2033, underscoring permit-timing uncertainty.

Funding and rates: consultants outlined three broad financing approaches — direct bank loan, public bond issuance, or participation in the Virginia Resources Authority (VRA) revenue pool — and recommended considering the VRA fall pool. Modeling assumed a 4% adjustment already included in the FY26 budget; additional smoothing scenarios would raise revenues roughly 5%–6% per year for the set of projects included in the current presentation. Consultants cautioned that including a full river intake and treatment plant (a project previously estimated at more than $100 million) would substantially increase required rate adjustments: "When we presented ... those rate increases were 15 to 20% per year," one consultant said.

Board questions and concerns: Supervisors pressed staff about developer contributions and proffers for growth behind Brickshire; staff said proffers are only permitted at rezoning and that connection fees would provide some revenue. Mr. Stiers urged the county to seek developer contributions. Supervisors also asked for a public work session to examine the numbers further.

Next steps: staff indicated they submitted a nonbinding VRA application to preserve the option of participating in the fall pool and recommended a public hearing and possible resolution at the board's Sept. 8 meeting. Mr. Voigt recommended a further work session so the board can consider rate scenarios and policy tradeoffs before committing to specific borrowing or cash infusions.