What do Sewers and Local Governments Have in Common?

[XLFD]

Among other things, they both smell bad.  The Ludington Torch broke the story earlier this year about irregularities in the Income Survey that was to be supposedly used for getting funds for the upgrading of Ludington's sewer system.  This botched survey ran by the government-funded RCAP is still in our crosshairs, as the survey pointman Michael Burrington (of RCAP)refuses to answer even the most rudimentary questions posed to him and believes his agency does not have to comply with the FOIA.

 

I thank our on-the-edge contributor, Lando Calrissian, for introducing me to a group called the Pentwater Daily News Herald Journal Tribune Beacon.   They gave me a heads up on this story of local interest.  This article originally appeared in the Oceana Herald Journal on the 8th, and appeared in the LDN on the 11th on the bottom half of page 3, and in a much-abbreviated form on the e-LDN.  Showing that Ludington City Hall does not have a monopoly on corrupt local practices in this area.  But isn't their City Manager an ex-City Manager of Ludington... ?

 

Pentwater sewer rate battle lands in court
 
By John Cavanagh
Herald-Journal Writer

PENTWATER — A number of Pentwater Township residents on the village wastewater treatment system are suing Pentwater Village, Pentwater Township and the Pentwater Board of Trustees over wastewater treatment issues.

 
The suit was filed in 27th Circuit Court in Hart Monday by attorney Erroll Goldman, who also is one of the complainants. Because the case involves the village and township, all local judges have disqualified themselves and the case will be assigned to a yet-to-be-named state judge.

The five count, eight-page complaint contends the village and township are in breach of contract and are unjustly enriching themselves by overcharging township users. It also contends that the township sewer ordinance is in conflict with the sewer contract and that the township violated the Michigan Open Meetings Act. The complaint also contends the village and township will use sewer funds to defend the lawsuit, thereby further increasing sewer rates. It is asking the court to make the village and township comply with the sewer contract, to recalculate sewer rates, to require any insufficient funds due on bonds be paid from the respective municipalities general funds and that any overpayments be returned plus costs and attorney fees.

The suit stems from rate increases that went into effect earlier this year when the quarterly rate went from $104.50 to $310.22. Goldman said the increases include an $81.62 quarterly rate increase, and a $34.10 per quarter sewer improvement fee and a $72 “catch up” fee along with other costs charged in preparation for the new wastewater treatment plant currently in the planning stages.

Goldman has no qualms with the new wastewater system being proposed, and said he thinks it will be good for the village.

“We don’t object to paying our fair share,” he said. “They are not following what the contract says and that is very specific as to how they (residents) should be charged.”

There are two sewer systems — A includes properties connected to the treatment plant; B includes the pressure sewer and septic tank system on the south side of Pentwater Lake.

The group Goldman represents is in the township portion of System A, on the north side of Pentwater Lake, along Business Route 31. There are 49 township users of the village sewer system in that area. The contract for village wastewater system used by those in the township was developed in 1984.

“The village shall charge a reasonable operation and maintenance user charge proportionate to its cost of such operation and maintenance (including replacement, improvement, and a proportionate share of debt service) for the volume of sewage flow from said system into the village system,” the 1984 sewer agreement between village and township states. The contract says rates and charges may be altered to reflect current costs, but indicates, “The charges shall be based on sewer meter readings made by the village at the boundaries of the township at the point of connection of the township’s portion of the system to the village’s portion of the system and at the point of connection between the entire collection system and the wastewater treatment plant.”

The complaint alleges the village and township are in breach of contract because:

• They failed to determine and apply the wastewater treatment rate formula for the township.

• They failed to maintain an accounting of costs and expenses for operation and maintenance of the pressure sewer system.

• They failed to install sewage meters required to determine prorated costs to township customers.

• They failed to take meter readings each Dec. 1 to be used to calculate township rates.

• They failed to pay for alleged insufficient funding for principal and interest on bonds from each governmental units general fund as required by the contract.

• They failed to maintain bond retirement funds in a separate account.

Under the unjust enrichment count, the plaintiffs claim the sewage meters were not working and were not replaced or repaired until approximately 2007 and that the village and township cannot determine actual “catch up” fees because the method required for calculating rates wasn’t followed. They claim the township is in violation of its own ordinance because rates charged for operation and maintenance are to be equal throughout the township and are not. The plaintiffs also seek to prevent the village and township from using sewer funds to defend the litigation, leading to a further increase in rates.

The plaintiffs also claim the township violated the Open Meetings Act in August when township Supervisor Chuck Smith responded to their July request for arbitration, saying he was responding on behalf of the Pentwater Township Board when the board never met to give Smith authorization to respond. They further claim that on or about Aug. 5, there was a meeting with two township officials and one village official when a third township official joined them, and created a quorum of township officials. The complaint claims the meeting wasn’t posted and no minutes were taken. The plaintiffs also claim the township continually violates the open meetings act because the supervisor, clerk and treasurer all work out of the same office on a daily basis.

Goldman had hoped to resolve the issue by asking for arbitration and not taking it to court.

“I tried to resolve this very low key,” Goldman said. “We just wanted another set of eyes to tell us if we were right or wrong.”

Village Manager Jim Miller said he was not aware of anyone connected with the village being served with the lawsuit as of about noon Tuesday. He said the issue has been a long term thing, and the two sides have argued back and forth and unfortunately nothing was resolved. Miller also said Goldman thinks he should billed the same rate as village customers.

“I’ve heard him say that a number of times,” Miller said.

Smith said the township was served with the lawsuit Tuesday morning and declined to comment.
 

 

[AQUAMAN]

Hmmm, this is a sad and a true unfair financial burden for the Pentwater residents. Didn't know Jim Miller lived in Pentwater, he must if he's the mgr. doesn't he? Anyhew, tripling the cost of sewer rates to residents overnite is just ridiculous, and I'm glad the residents are suing now. Hope they can win too, sounds like they should prevail and have a good Attorney.  

[XLFD]

Pentwater and Ludington have so many natural assets among the environment and the natives.  Our greedy local governments are controlled by mostly disinterested outsiders looking to exploit our people and our resources for their own ends(CM Miller probably still has a bad taste in his mouth after the way he was let go as Ludington CM, and he was no angel here). 

 

The sad thing is, there may be no real winners here.  The city will likely reach a deal, pay off the suing parties, and raise the residents' taxes and fees to compensate for the loss of revenue.  It's too bad the politicos involved aren't given their own civil penalties deducted from their own pay and savings.  Or do the penance if what they do is criminal.

[Willy]

It's to bad that the residents will be paying for this dispute. One thing that does stick out as being unusual is the size of the quarterly rate increase. I wonder if that rate increase is a misprint. An increase of 200% is something to complain about especially if it is unexpected.

[XLFD]

The suit stems from rate increases that went into effect earlier this year when the quarterly rate went from $104.50 to $310.22. Goldman said the increases include an $81.62 quarterly rate increase, and a $34.10 per quarter sewer improvement fee and a $72 “catch up” fee along with other costs charged in preparation for the new wastewater treatment plant currently in the planning stages.

 

Nope, RJE, the figures add up.  It went from $104.50 to $310.22 with all the fees.  Our local governments use fees sometimes as a  tax on certain individuals, whereas this is generally illegal if it isn't based on 'user fees'.  I discussed this earlier this year on the Municipal Services Fee imposed on the Arbors Apartments (aka Longfellow Towers).  The City of Ludington levied a tripling of the amount of money they paid in taxes when they decided to make them pay for local services whereas the rest of the city had no MS fee.  A totally illegal 'tax', soon to hopefully be reversed.