Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sump Pump Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables plan to develop sump-pump disconnection program after extended debate
Summary
Board members debated a proposed sump-pump disconnection program—covering detection methods, incentives versus penalties and likely costs—and asked staff and consultants to return with a more tailored draft. The motion to table passed and staff will refine the scope.
A proposal to develop a program to identify and reduce residential sump-pump discharges into the sanitary system was discussed at length and tabled for further work.
Program staff described Task Order #13 as a study and policy-development effort to identify where sump pumps discharge, recommend detection methods and provide education and implementation options. Mary, a consultant on the line, said the scope would "include setting up a policy, details that show how the connection needs to happen to your storm system," and would provide guidance for cases where a storm system is not present.
Board members raised practical concerns. One member warned that smoke testing and house-to-house inspections each have limits and recommended more targeted methods: "Smoke testing is probably about 50% accurate," a commissioner said, while another noted camera inspections from mainlines can identify extra connections where accessible. Several trustees emphasized that any program must start with accurate location data before offering incentives or penalties.
Costs and incentives were debated. Staff referenced an estimate line in the draft scope (a figure of $27,000 was mentioned in packet discussions), but several members said the draft needed clearer, locally tailored detection options and an explicit plan for homeowner outreach and possible subsidy structures.
After discussing trade-offs—"a carrot to draw them in or a hammer to keep them from going the wrong way," as one member put it—the board moved and seconded a motion to table Task Order #13 so staff and the consultant can develop a revised draft tailored to the district's needs. The board asked staff to return with refined methods, clearer cost estimates and options for incentives and enforcement at a future meeting.
