Westminster council backs effort to reconstitute county sewer authority; study to assess assets and rates

Westminster — The Westminster City Council on Sept. 9 voted to endorse ongoing work by the Oconee Joint Regional Sewer Authority (OJRSA) to reconstitute its governance and consider moving all sewer assets in Oconee County under one new authority, council members heard.

Council members heard a detailed presentation from the city's OJRSA representative outlining five major recommendations from a regional feasibility study funded by a $100,000 Rural Infrastructure Authority grant. The study recommends creating a single countywide sewer authority, conducting a technical and financial valuation of existing sewer assets, drafting a new governance document that would supersede prior agreements, and establishing a reconstitution committee to implement the plan.

The report said the study's committee is considering making Oconee County a member of the new authority to reflect county investments in sewer infrastructure, adding that any change would likely require a change in state law. "We have draft language," the presenter told council members, and staff said they have shared it with state legislators. The proposed board structure would be five members appointed by the governor after recommendations from the local legislative delegation; the draft calls for one-person-one-vote and for board membership to exclude current elected officials and city employees.

Council members pressed for more detailed cost and asset information. "What does that financial analysis say each system is worth?" one councilmember asked; another said Westminster residents will want to know whether their rates will fall or rise. The presenter said a consultant-led technical and financial evaluation is next and estimated Westminster's share of that study could be in the range of $14,000 to $24,000, but the final scope and cost were not yet set.

City staff emphasized the practical reasons behind the proposal: economies of scale, consolidated operation and maintenance costs, and the authority's ability to borrow on its own if it becomes a standalone entity. The presenter noted recent local sewer investments, including a $5 million sewer line replacement project funded by $4 million from the South Carolina Rural Infrastructure Authority and $1 million from the city, and said new assets would be part of any valuation. He also told the council that some older lines represent liabilities that would need to be weighed against newer assets.

Councilmembers raised concerns about representation and accountability if a nongovernmental-style authority manages sewer services. One councilmember said removing elected officials from the board could reduce direct political accountability: "When that entity does not have elected officials to hold accountable, rates can do whatever they do," she said. The presenter replied that the proposed authority would remain a public entity with open board meetings and urged that the city and other stakeholders participate in developing the communications plan so the public understands changes.

The resolution the council approved is nonbinding; it signals Westminster's support for the committee's work but does not finalize asset transfers or rate changes. Staff said the committee expects to complete the financial and technical evaluation within several months but acknowledged the schedule could extend; the committee is also trying to avoid moving major steps through while voters elect new councils in November. The presenter said the next reconstitution committee meeting is scheduled for Thursday at 9 a.m. at the OJRSA and that it is open to the public and streamed on YouTube.

Councilmembers who spoke in favor said they were inclined to support the concept but requested concrete numbers before any final action. "I do too. And I just would like to see some numbers," one councilmember said. The council voted to adopt the resolution supporting the ongoing reconstitution work.

The discussion also covered practical transition issues: how franchise fees and meter-reading fees might be handled, whether the new authority would bill customers directly or work through city billing, how bond covenants and existing loans would be disentangled, and what happens if a city chooses not to join (cities that declined would need their own NPDES discharge permits). Staff said those items would be addressed during the financial and technical evaluation and in future committee work.