Selectboard Meeting

October 29, 2007

 

Attending the meeting:  Rob Bast, Andrea Morgante, Howard Russell, Jon Trefry,  Jeanne Wilson, Rocky Martin, Alex Weinhagen, Wayne Elliott, Lloyd Seemann, Marlene Saunders, Richard Zybura, Tom Herbick, Bob Wood, George Znoj, Steve Aube, Mark Miller, Becky Miller, Howard Kimball, Kris Perlee, Jen Perlee, Jason Boivin, Allen Rushford, Diane Snelling, Leo Fortin, George Palmer, Karl Novak, Trisha Novak, Bill Lippert, John Dunshee, Ross Orvis, George Dameron, Penrose Jackson, Schuyler Jackson, Ruth Ayer, Raymond Ayer, Patricia Durda, Guy Maglaris, Bobbi Jo Maglaris, John Veilleux, Art Thompson, David Lyman, Barbara Lyman, James Stowe, Paul Lamberson, Roger Kohn, Peter Erb, Henry Benis, John King, Paul Young, David Fenn, Glenn Bomberger, Kevin Couture, Kathleen Couture, Charles Kogge, Tom Joslin, Anne Donegan, Carol Jenkins, Ken Brown, Sue Johnson, Patti Drew, Carl Bohlen, Tom Ayer, Tom Hackett, Jerry Wetzel

 

Due to the large attendance, the Selectboard met in the Main Hall.

 

Informational meeting on proposed upgrade and expansion of wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) in preparation for November 6, 2007 bond vote:

 

Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Rob Bast.  Rob introduced Selectboard member Howard Russell, a member of the WWTF Upgrade & Expansion Project committee.  Howard gave an overview of the project, explaining the history of the wastewater treatment system and the steps that had been completed to date to investigate an upgrade and expansion of the facility.  Howard explained that an expansion was necessary because capacity was virtually exhausted.  Howard noted that the Selectboard unanimously supports this proposal because it:

1.      supports the vision outlined in the Town Plan of concentrating growth in the village;

2.      allows greater opportunity for affordable and moderately priced housing;

3.      allows the ability to meet the needs of the elders;

4.      provides for local services, and will allow all to access needs locally;

5.      allows for new and expanded business opportunities and more local jobs;

6.      will help to maintain the rural character of the community, with a vibrant center surrounded by open areas.

 

Howard explained that without the expansion development will not occur in the village, and the entire focus for development will be on outlying areas.

 

Since there will not be an immediate pool of users to pay for the expansion portion of the bond, the Selectboard is proposing that tax dollars be used to fund the part of the expansion portion of the bond which is not covered by new allocation and connection fees.  Other funding sources have been investigated, and the only option is a low-interest loan through the State.  Howard noted that some have questioned why money has not been collected from users and set aside for this project.  He felt that Selectboard member Randy Volk answered this question best in saying – why would we take your money and set it aside with no project in mind?  That is what bonding is for.

 

Director of Planning & Zoning Alex Weinhagen reviewed how the proposal relates to the Town Plan and current efforts on revisions to the zoning regulations.  Alex noted that the Planning Commission has been working for two years on the village re-zoning project.  The commission’s efforts to create a vibrant village center were deemed a priority by the Town Plan.  The proposed village re-zoning proposal relies on an expansion of the wastewater capacity.  The vision is to concentrate development in areas where historically development has occurred.  This is a more efficient use of resources.  There will still be development in rural areas, but the community has said it would like growth in a concentrated area.

 

Alex explained that housing in the village area (on smaller lots with municipal infrastructure) can be constructed far more affordably than in rural areas.  Furthermore, the commission is proposing that developers be required to build a certain number of affordable units.

 

Wayne Elliott of Forcier Aldrich Associates (FAA) presented an overview of the technical aspects of the proposal from an engineering standpoint.  The WWTF is currently permitted for 250,000 gpd, with 51% of the capacity being used by Saputo.  Wayne explained that FAA had evaluated the existing facility, examining means of increasing energy efficiency and performance and prioritizing deficiencies.  The upgrade portion of the project is estimated to cost $1.8 million. 

 

The first step in seeking an expansion of the system is to amend the discharge permit from 250,000 gpd to 450,000 gpd.  The permit would need to comply with stringent discharge limits. 

For the expansion portion of the project, FAA looked at four alternatives.  The preferred alternative was to utilize the same discharge method with liquid disinfection.  The expansion portion of the project is estimated to cost $1.9 million.  The total project cost (for upgrade and expansion) is $3.7 million.

 

Engineering and permitting would occur during 2008, with construction occurring in 2009.

 

Director of Buildings & Facilities Rocky Martin reviewed proposed project funding.  The cost of the upgrade, as well as O&M costs, would be covered through user fees.  It is anticipated that the average annual household cost would increase from $160 to $274.

 

The rates for Saputo would increase from $99,000 annually to $182,000.

 

The expansion portion of the project would be covered by a combination of allocation fees, connection fees and tax dollars.  Rocky explained that the fees for connection and allocation were increased effective July 1, 2007.

 

Selectboard member Jon Trefry noted that, even though he is not a user of the wastewater system, he is supportive of paying tax dollars towards this project since he feels it is critical in creating an economically viable community center.

 

Rob Bast then opened the floor to questions and comments.  Questions and comments noted below, with answers (if applicable) in italics:

 

Are system users exempt from the tax for bond payment?  No.

How many years will the expansion last?  Estimated at least 25 years.

What is the life of the bond?  Twenty years.

What portion of the bond payment will developers be paying?  Allocation and connection fees will be applied towards the expansion portion of bond.

How do the proposed rates compare to other towns?  Approximately the median rate for towns in Chittenden County.

Is it legal to assess a tax on residents who cannot connect to the system?  Yes.

Is it possible to phase in capacity?  Reducing the amount of capacity does not significantly reduce the cost of the project.

Will Efficiency Vermont be part of the project?  Quite likely, but it is too early in the design to determine what role they will play.

Planning for village and rural areas should be complete before putting the infrastructure in place.  The length of time to engineer, permit and construct this project is significant (2009 for completion); this allows time for the planning effort to be completed.

The output from Saputo is pre-treated.  The new rate structure is very high for low BOD.  This rate structure is not going to be attractive to other industries.  Has the Town advised Saputo of this proposal?  Yes, Saputo has been informed throughout the planning and development of the proposal.

Can the bond be split now into upgrade and expansion?  No, the bond has been warned as one unit.  If the bond vote fails, the Selectboard will probably come back quickly with another bond proposal for the upgrade only.

The first bond payment will not be due until 2011, but allocation and connection fees were increased in 2007.  By the time the first bond payment is due, the Town will have collected a significant amount of revenue.  The tax implications are over-stated.

What will be the impact on the schools?  The users have been subsidizing the cost for CVU.  It is fair to have all the towns contributing fairly to the cost of wastewater treatment for CVU.

The entire bond cannot be paid for through new housing.  Tax dollars will still be necessary to pay off bond.

How are cost over-runs paid for?  Contingencies and inflation are calculated into the cost estimate.

What type of wastewater projects are there grant funding available for?  Only phosphorus grants, which Hinesburg does not qualify for.

Were other processes investigated?  There are other types of processes, but it is a matter of cost.  The proposed alternative represents what was felt to be a reasonable expense.  The average wastewater rate has been $160 annually.  This is the lowest rate Wayne Elliot is aware of.  The average rate is $400 annually.

Future development should pay for expansion.

Promoting a vibrant village center could be an argument against the expansion proposal for village residents since it could diminish the quality of life.  The expansion may not lead to more affordable housing or housing for the elderly.  Hinesburg is going to grow.  Development is going to happen somewhere.  The Town is looking to the Planning Commission to give guidance on where the growth occurs.  We cannot close the door on further growth.

What is driving the need for the expansion?  We have heard from some current businesses that they would like to stay in Hinesburg, but cannot due to limited wastewater capacity.  Another driving factor is the need for affordable housing.

Couldn’t the expansion be paid for by raising user rates?  Was there a hard look at having the users pay, or was it easier to just spread the burden over the whole town?  This was discussed.  The current users do not need the expansion any more than the rest of the community – they are already connected.  It didn’t make sense to have the users bear the entire burden since everyone benefits.

Twenty years ago it was said the facility had reached capacity.  It was a different problem twenty years ago – that was a problem relating to levels of dissolved solids, which has been corrected.

If Saputo is using pre-treatment, couldn’t they bypass our system and free up capacity?  All output flow levels have to be accounted for (whether separate or combined).  It is virtually impossible to get approval for a new discharge permit.

It has been stated that the Town needs affordable housing so children can grow up and stay here, but current zoning does not allow for subdivision in rural areas so landowners can create lots for their children.

Helping the community get businesses and high paying jobs should be a priority.  We have to start now, because businesses are not going to wait two or three years – they will go elsewhere.

Are pressures for expansion coming from the residential side or commercial side?  As residential growth increases, the need for businesses and services to support that growth increases.

Wouldn’t it make sense to drive future residential growth into the rural areas, and keep the capacity in the village for commercial and industrial growth?

What is going to bring businesses to Hinesburg?  It is not just about bringing new businesses to Hinesburg, but also about allowing existing businesses to grow and expand. Also need capacity to provide services to the people who live and work here. There is currently not enough capacity to bring much more than a couple restaurants to town.

Is this proposal consistent with the Town Plan?  Yes

Then this is a no-brainer.  If it is consistent with the Town Plan, then this is what we have to do.

 

Rob thanked everyone for coming and reminded them to vote on November 6.

 

Meeting adjourned at 9:40 pm.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

Jeanne Kundell Wilson

Hinesburg Town Administrator