Sewer expansion a contentious topic

VERNON — A clash of opinions on a potential expansion of the township's water and sewer systems persisted Monday, heightened by an analysis presented by hired engineers.
Engineering firm Remington and Vernick, which was hired by the council in June 2016 to conduct a sewer utility expansion study, presented its findings to the council. The analysis looked at a 10-year period running from 2017 to 2027, and covered three expansion possibilities: no sewer expansion and no rate increase; no expansion with a rate increase; and an expansion with no rate increase.
According to the firm's projections, none of the scenarios present an easy fix for the Municipal Utilities Authority's (MUA) current shortfall.
With no expansion or rate increase, Remington and Vernick projected the MUA would run into a deficit of more than $2.77 million by 2020, with that figure increasing to more than $15.6 million by 2027.
In the second scenario with no expansion but an increase in rates, Remington found tiered annual rate increases of 30 percent in 2017 and 2018, 6 percent in 2019 and 2020, and 5 percent through 2027 would be needed for the MUA to avoid shortfalls and build up a $1 million surplus to address emergencies. That would translate to a $980 annual fee in 2016 for a resident in a three-bedroom house, which would increase to $2,618 by 2027.
The final scenario of an expansion but no rate increase projected the addition of 72 connections per year, but Remington noted it would still take several years to meet the minimum flow requirements set by the Sussex County MUA. The firm also estimated some $16 million would be needed for sewer infrastructure construction. As a result, Remington concluded that even with an increase in users and additional revenue from user and connection fees, the MUA would still suffer a shortfall over the forecast period.
Remington and Vernick Associate Stephanie Cuthbert indicated a potential fourth scenario with an expansion plus rate increase would have a similar result to the second scenario.
But Councilman Dick Wetzel argued Remington's projections didn't present the whole picture.
“I think you're presenting a dark picture, but only half the picture,” Wetzel said. “I think we need the other half. I think we need to have a study to see the feasibility of sewers, nevermind the financial aspect.”
Similarly, MUA Vice Chairman Edward Seger said the firm's assumptions — including a lack of contributions from Mountain Creek and the need for a financial reserve — were flawed. Without building up a reserve, he said, the cost would be half of Remington's estimates and with the addition of new users, the rates wouldn't increase at all. Town Auditor Chuck Ferraioli, who completed estimates for the MUA, said he didn't disagree with Remington's math, but said the difference in outlook was all about the assumptions made in the assessment.
The dispute reignited debate among the council about whether the MUA should be allowed to move forward with the study mentioned by Wetzel, an issue that was originally raised in Ordinance 15-190 in 2015.
Councilman Patrick Rizzuto argued the council's decision to table that ordinance was blocking the MUA from doing its job. But Council President Jean Murphy and Councilman Dan Kadish said the text of the ordinance wouldn't have authorized just a study — it would have endorsed a change to the township's wastewater management plan.
The council on Monday ultimately agreed to come together in a sort of work session meeting with the MUA, with the goal of discussing the matter further to make headway and potentially even define the sewer service area. A date for that meeting has yet to be scheduled.