Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Service topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Stokesdale defers decision on developer's request to tie Forsyth County subdivision into town water; capacity and interlocal questions remain

Stokesdale Town Council · November 15, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A developer asked to connect a Forsyth County subdivision to Stokesdale's water system; council discussed capacity (town currently buying up to 500,000 gpd from Forsyth/Winston system, average use ~185,000 gpd), system development fees, potential pump‑station costs, and whether sales back into Forsyth would count against the town's purchased allocation; council deferred action and asked staff and consultants to pursue modeling and clarify interlocal implications.

Brent Sievers of FEI Engineering presented a developer request to tie a planned subdivision in Forsyth County into the Stokesdale water system. Sievers said he was present to answer technical questions while council and staff reviewed a business case and existing modeling.

Town staff summarized previous Hazen & Sawyer modeling and more recent local consumption data: the town's trailing 12‑month average water use is roughly 185,000 gallons per day and the town's contracted capacity with Forsyth/Winston systems had been increased from 300,000 to 500,000 gpd about 18 months earlier. Staff noted that the Hazen & Sawyer study projected demand out to 2060 and that the town had room under the 500,000 gpd allocation for many years under current residential growth scenarios, but that commercial or industrial customers could materially change demand projections.

Council and staff discussed several technical and policy questions that remain unresolved: whether water sold back into Forsyth County from lines extending across the county line would be counted against Stokesdale's purchased allocation from Forsyth/Winston; whether the town would need a pump station or other capital work to reliably deliver substantially more than 500,000 gpd (estimates for major pump stations were discussed in the meeting as potentially in the seven‑figure range); who would own and maintain water mains once installed (the town would own mains placed in the subdivision); and whether there should be an interlocal agreement with Forsyth County about operations and capacity accounting.

Residents raised concerns about the town taking on another jurisdiction's water needs, potential liabilities in a disaster, and fairness for Forsyth County residents who would not vote in Stokesdale elections but would receive water services. Eileen Berry urged caution: "Why take on the responsibility of someone else's water? What happens if a disaster hits here and we can't fulfill our obligation to them?" Town officials said the practice of selling water outside municipal limits is common in North Carolina but stressed the need for modeling and legal review before proceeding.

Council did not approve the request. Members asked the consultant (Hazen & Sawyer) and staff to run updated demand and build‑out modeling, to contact Forsyth/Winston officials to learn whether outside sales would count against the town's allocation, and to return with options, cost estimates (including potential pump station costs) and recommended contract language before placing a vote on a future agenda.

Why it matters: The request could increase water enterprise revenue but raises long‑term operational, capital and liability questions—particularly whether the town can reliably supply outside customers without expensive infrastructure upgrades or without consuming capacity needed for future Stokesdale growth.

What happens next: Council asked staff and consultants for more modeling, to engage Forsyth/Winston system managers on capacity and allocation questions, and to return with recommendations; the item was deferred pending those answers.