Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Water Sewer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sanitary engineer faces staffing, rate and fee decisions as water advisory panel raises concerns
Summary
Trumbull County sanitary engineer and an advisory panel sought pay changes and staff promotions to address project backlogs while trustees and townships raised concerns about rate impacts, staffing timelines and transparency; the board also considered increases to meter and permit fees and new permit rules to recover rising installation costs.
Trumbull County commissioners heard an extended presentation from the county sanitary engineer and the water advisory panel about staffing shortages, proposed pay adjustments, and proposed increases to a range of water and sewer fees intended to shore up system finances and cover rising installation and meter costs.
Why it matters: Sanitary engineer staff and the advisory panel said the department is understaffed and that projects are delayed; trustees and some commissioners urged caution, saying rate payers already face increases and that advisory board recommendations need clearer analysis and public vetting.
What the engineer requested: Gary Newbrow, Trumbull County sanitary engineer, outlined several items including a proposed promotion/compensation adjustment for a current employee who has taken on additional duties and a request to add engineering staff to handle a backlog of design and construction projects. Newbrow said the immediate budget impact of a requested promotion is relatively small (around $2,000 net to certain water funds), and that overall his office brings significant reimbursements and grants into county coffers.
Advisory panel reaction and trustee concerns: Members of the newly formed water advisory panel and township trustees described receiving a large amount of material at an initial meeting and said they had insufficient time to review proposals for rate increases and new hires. Several trustees urged the commission to let the advisory panel meet again and finalize recommendations, and asked for clearer cost-benefit and succession analyses. Trustee Rex and others recommended using consultants for peak workloads rather than immediate full-time hires or broad pay escalations.
Fees and permit proposals: The sanitary engineer presented requests to adjust several fees and rates: - Hydrant meters (“hydrometers”): current rental $50 per year; staff proposed raising to $250 per quarter (or higher) to recover the purchase cost (~$3,500 per meter) and accelerate payback. - Volumetric meters (temporary pool meters) were proposed to remain unchanged. - Standard house-connection permits and hot-tap charges: staff recommended raising permit fees (examples in the packet included raising standard connection fees and hot-tap installation charges) because meter and installation costs have increased. - Fire-line charges: staff proposed modest increases to monthly charge for dedicated fire lines; commissioners and business representatives discussed the insurance-like nature of the fee and the monthly water-equivalent that would be covered by the charge.
Panel vote and next steps: The water advisory panel largely favored some staffing changes and fee adjustments, but trustees and several commissioners asked the panel to reconvene to provide clearer cost analyses and to consider contracting out some design work. Commissioners also asked staff to prepare a revised fee schedule (including weekly or daily rental options for hydrometers) and to explore grants and partnership options to mitigate direct rate impacts on residents.
Other utilities and projects: The sanitary engineer reported a credit on a construction contract (AP Lake project) and said bids for the Pendleton/Gilmore sewer project came in substantially below estimates, which would reduce overall project debt. He also described inflow and infiltration (I&I) as a continuing, expensive problem that will require inspection programs and possible home-level repairs or grants to resolve.
No formal board vote on staffing or fee changes was recorded in the transcript; commissioners said they would take the advisory panel feedback, request further analysis and likely reconvene the advisory panel before final decisions.
Ending: Commissioners directed staff to return with more detailed cost breakdowns, consider phased or pilot fee approaches (for example, a weekly hydrometer rental rate), and to let the advisory panel revisit its recommendations before the board takes final action.
