Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Wastewater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fredonia trustees debate sewer district contract, rates and term proposed by county
Summary
Trustees discussed a draft contract for sewer service affecting two parcels and a referenced Pomfret/PPSD arrangement; trustees objected to a proposed multi-decade term and large rate jump and asked staff to negotiate with the district and county and to involve counsel.
Trustees spent a prolonged portion of the Feb. 18 meeting debating proposed sewer contract language and proposed rates affecting parcels currently served by the Pomfret (PPSD) sewer arrangement and other small districts.
Several trustees said the 30-year (transcript: 32-year referenced in discussion) proposed contract term was unacceptable. Trustees and board members criticized a proposed jump to $14 per thousand gallons for certain users and questioned a county resolution that had earlier set a $3.08 per thousand figure for some customers. One trustee said a 200% increase “coming out of left field” would be unfair to customers. Members urged the village to exclude the district from unilateral decisions and to include district representatives in any rate discussions.
Trustees agreed to seek numerical scenarios from village staff (treasurer/finance staff named Elyssa/Alyssa in the transcript) to calculate revenue impacts and asked staff to meet with the district and county representatives. Multiple trustees recommended involving village counsel before signing any long-term contract.
The board did not approve the county-drafted contract during the meeting. Several trustees recommended limiting any contract term to a short number of years rather than decades and to negotiate rate-setting language tied to percentage increases rather than fixed-dollar steps. One trustee recommended not signing a 30-year agreement and instead pursuing a maximum of five years until terms were acceptable.
The discussion also noted that the parcels in question currently encompass four businesses and that, under past arrangements, the village maintained infrastructure while some districts maintained their own internal piping. Trustees requested further data from plant metering and flow records to inform negotiation.
No formal motion to sign a contract was made; trustees directed staff to continue negotiations and to involve the village attorney.
