Advisory Board, Berry disagree on water rate
Published on December 24th, 2003
STONEHAM, MA - Town Administrator David Berry will bridge a projected $330,000 water deficit with funds from the town's stabilization account and other sources, according to Water and Sewer Advisory Board Chairwoman Therese DiBlasi.
According to DiBlasi, Berry informed her of his decision after the Water and Sewer Advisory Board recommended that the town increase the cost of 100 cubic feet of water (or 748 gallons) by 75 cents.
"After looking at all the facts, we recommended going with the 75 cent increase. [Berry] is not going along with our recommendation...that's what I was told. He's going to use the stabilization account and other sources," DiBlasi said.
Berry, who is on vacation, couldn't be reached to confirm his plans as of press time.
The reported decision comes on the heels of a recommendation by several Selectmen that the town forego the increase in light of the use of nearly $950,000 of water and sewer surpluses to balance the FY04 budget.
"We've got $1.2 million in the stabilization account and it's my feeling that it should go to the water and sewer to offset the rate increases for a couple of reasons," said Selectman Cosmo Ciccarello at last Tuesday's Board of Selectmen meeting.
"It's the right thing to do. What we did back then was wrong...Now citizens are getting whacked both ways because they can't claim the increase on their income tax because it's a fee," added Ciccarello in a post-meeting interview.
Although Selectmen Chairwoman Mary Pecoraro agreed with Ciccarello that the water deficit should be offset with stabilization monies, she cautioned that doing so would inhibit the town's ability to address a potential $4.5 million municipal deficit for FY05.
While he reiterated his staunch opposition to an override given the fact that town employees received a pay raise this year, Ciccarello believes that since citizens can write off property taxes, the use of the stabilization account to offset the water deficit represents the fairest option.
"This way they can claim the increase on their income tax. It's the least we can do...it would still have to go to Town Meeting because it's a use of the stabilization account, but I think the Town Meeting audience would go along with it," remarked Ciccarello.
While Pecoraro and Ciccarello both voiced their desire to see the water deficit controlled through the use of the stabilization account, the option was first publically proposed by former Selectman Darin Leahy.
Offering the solution at a public hearing held by the Water and Sewer Advisory Board an hour before last Tuesday's Board of Selectmen meeting, Leahy pleaded with board members not to raise the water rates.
"We had a very large water and sewer surplus of about $1.5 million. And you underestimated the water use and that's fine...But the point is, there's still $1 million in the stabilization account. So these rates really don't have to go up," explained Leahy.
"Why should this deficit be treated differently than any other deficit in town? It's just a bad time to raise the rates and I just ask you to wait to raise the water rates," Leahy added.
After finding out for the first time about the town's use of nearly $950,000 in water and sewer surpluses at the meeting, Stoneham resident John Ellis labeled the proposed rate increases as a sneaky way to raise taxes.
"The town needs money and they can't do it with proposition 2 and 1/2. So they take the water surpluses and then raise my water rates. This is a sneaky way to raise taxes. This is not right..." complained Ellis.
However, before Ellis could speak further, DiBlasi stifled the Stoneham resident, claiming he wasn't putting forth any facts for her board to consider.
"This is a fact finding committee and not a town meeting," the Chairwoman said, quieting the Standish Road resident.
Perhaps the most outspoken of all residents, Stoneham resident Frank Pignone questioned a statement made by Department of Public Works Director Bob Grover that Kraft Foods was partially responsible for the 13 percent decrease in the town's water consumption.
Claiming to obtain confidential correspondence and contracts from Kraft that legally binded the company to use 90 percent of water used in previous years, Pignone asserted that the townspeople shouldn't be footing the water deficit bill.
"I have a confidential letter saying they would use 90 percent of the water and if they're not, they're probably in breach of contract...People of this community shouldn't be paying for their bill," remarked Pignone.
After threatening lawsuits, cutting off speakers in mid-sentence, and shouting and yelling out of turn, DiBlasi later silenced Pignone for being unable to contain himself.
However, in a post-meeting interview, DiBlasi confirmed that her board will look into the Kraft Food issue. However, she remains skeptical that the company is in breach of its contract.
"We are looking into Kraft Foods. But we doubt very much that they're in breach because of the way their contract is written...They key word is portable water. They're responsible for portable water and that's all. Mr. Pignone is wrong," said DiBlasi.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!