Two recurring topics were discussed by the City of Salem’s Utility Committee during the Sept. 13 meeting: drinking water testing and utility customers that live outside city limits.
Drinking water quality has been discussed repeatedly in prior meetings of the committee. Some members of the public who were present at the meetings said they have been experiencing cloudy water and were concerned about possible contamination. During discussion in previous meetings, city staff maintained that the water is tested regularly as mandated by federal drinking water regulations and enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency, and that the system is not in violation of any MCL’s (Maximum Contaminant Levels) as established by the EPA. A search of the Missouri Department of Natural Resource's database shows this to be true, and the Salem Public Water System has not had any violations since 2016. At the Aug. 9 meeting of the committee, quotes for supplemental testing were reviewed, and the committee discussed the possibility of performing extra testing beyond what is required by law. No motion was made to do so during that meeting. The topic was brought up again as part of the Sept. 13 agenda.
“This was per well, $3,691 per well,” said City Administrator Sally Burbridge.
“There was some talk that you guys might want to go ahead and test something, and run a full suite. I will say, you heard from [a city utility employee] last time, that our water has come back typically exceptional, but movements and changes of the current and the flow of the water, sometimes a little residue gets kicked up, and that may discolor the water. But, it is still on the table, if the committee wanted to recommend any additional testing for what we’re doing,” said Committee Chairman and Aldermen Kyle Williams.
Said committee member John Hambacker, “I think his presentation was quite complete, and if individuals want to test something at their home, then I don’t know if that’s the city’s problem, but I think that this explanation was quite good. I had to test it when I had Camp Zoe, and I had to test it every year. It was out of my pocket.”
Williams asked the committee how they wanted to proceed.
“Donnie [Moore, with City Utilities] gave me a call today, and he said he’s willing and able to test it. He said it would take some time out of their schedule, and they have a pretty busy schedule already,” said Williams. “The option is there, but if I don’t have any motions or anything to have an additional test, we can move on.”
No motion was made regarding additional water testing, and the meeting moved on to the second recurring topic: City utility customers that live outside city limits.
Water and sewer rates for those customers have been higher than inside-limits customers for some time. In a previous meeting, the utility committee had recommended to the board of aldermen a rate increase for electric customers outside of city limits. The proposed increase for those customers was 26%, and the committee also recommended doubling the availability fee. During the discussion preceding the recommendation, committee members discussed city services that they felt were being utilized by those customers who do not pay property taxes in the city. Some examples given included police, parks, and roads. Some residents whose property is technically outside the city limits live on roads that receive city maintenance, and some reside in areas that the Salem Police Department responds to. Others, like a portion of properties to the north of town on Highway 19, receive only electric and trash service, and no other city service.
An analysis of the city’s budget (page 9 on the budget presentation available on the city’s website) reveals that at least some of those services (police and road maintenance) are contained within the General Fund expenditures which are majority funded by sales tax collected within the city. Sales tax accounts for 67% of general fund revenue, with property tax commanding just 11% of the total. 17% of general fund revenue comes from “other sources”, which includes transfers from the electric fund, which have decreased significantly in this budget versus previous years. The Parks & Recreation fund is also funded through a 3/8% sales tax as well as charges for services such as pool admission.
The recommendation to increase the electric rates for those customers was rejected by the Board of Aldermen during their July 11 meeting. The vote to reject was 3-1, with Williams holding out against the rejection. Mayor Greg Parker, Alderman Shawn Bolerjack, and Alderwoman Kala Sisco said they were contacted by several people who thought the proposed increase was not fair.
During a July 12 meeting of the committee, Williams said he had been asked why the board rejected the recommendation.
“I personally can’t answer for them, I can say I voted against the denial of that. […] I’m giving general thoughts here. They thought it was too much of a punishment for citizens outside of Salem, that we were trying to bully them into annexing into the city, and paying city taxes,” said Williams. “A lot of us got a lot of calls, however, and I’m guessing they were swayed by some of those calls.”
During an Aug. 9 meeting of the committee, members expressed frustration with the board’s decision, and confusion as to what kind of recommendation the aldermen were looking for.
“There was no distinction as to what it [the board's specific objection] was, and I tried to raise it. I was for it, I went along with the committee’s recommendation,” said Williams during that meeting. Committee members Harold Hamilton and Nathan Kinsey signaled their disagreement with the aldermen’s decision to reject the recommendation, with Kinsey saying he disapproved of the aldermen being “swayed by people who did not live inside their jurisdictions.”
Later during that meeting, the committee decided to accept a staff recommendation establishing new service hookup rates and stipulations for out-of-town utility customers by a 3-0 vote. Following the vote, the committee asked Williams if he would reach out to the other aldermen to request their presence at the Sept. 13 meeting to continue the discussion and give guidance for a recommendation that would be acceptable to them, and Williams agreed to pass the request on.
Williams was the only alderman present during the Sept. 13 meeting. He said he passed on the committee’s request, and that the aldermen wanted to have a closed session meeting with the committee to talk about the issue.
“This is a bit my fault. Talking to the aldermen, I did let them know about your concerns, albeit a little later. They do want to meet; they do want to have a workshop. What they would like to do is have you guys possibly come to the next alderman meeting on the 26th, and they can have a closed session to see what you guy’s thoughts and arguments are, and we can have a sit down and talk this out to see where we want to go with outside utilities. Because, I let them know that you guys don’t know where to go. […] I told them that you guys were ready to send up the same recommendation. So, they want to meet and talk and have a workshop,” said Williams.
Committee members signaled their willingness to attend, and discussion began about when they should arrive to the meeting. City Administrator Sally Burbridge said that closed sessions are usually held following the meeting.
A citizen in the gallery interjected as the committee discussed the meeting.
“Kyle, I thought you had to have a reason for a closed session,” said the citizen. “It’s like a statute reason. So why would this qualify?”
Replied Burbridge, “I don’t have that off the top of my head.”
“Then why have a closed session? I thought that there were specific reasons,” replied the citizen.
“Because there are legal issues that we would need to consult with our attorney concerning territory outside of city limits, providing utilities,” said Burbridge.
“It’s a privileged consultation with an attorney,” said Williams.
“So, are the people that this is going to involve going to be there? The people from outside that are having the issue with this?” asked the citizen.
“This is with the utility committee and the board of aldermen,” replied Burbridge.
“So, we’re going to talk about different legal aspects of this, what the consequences are, and what’s available to us, so that way we do not have motions and recommendations pushed forward that could cause legal issues,” said Williams.
Williams and the committee continued to discuss an arrival time for the committee. No further motion or recommendation was made.
No other recommendations passed during the meeting.
Burbridge gave an update on some new features planned for utility billing. The city has been working on implementing Exceleron billing services, which when active, will allow customers to pre-pay or pay online, and view their usage. Burbridge said that while the pre-pay system and app is not ready for rollout, there are some features of the service that may be able to be implemented soon. She said the city is working on setting up card payment fees, and if all goes well, some services could be running within the next few weeks. The two components of the service likely to be rolled out in the coming weeks include online bill pay, and a 24/7 automated phone line for payments. She also said the city is working on implementing email billing, which she said may begin testing within a week.
