Montville Sewer Rate Reduction May Be in Jeopardy

Town owes more to Parsippany waste water treatment plant than projected and municipal officials are unsure whether lowering rates in January will be feasible.

New technology at the Parsippany-Troy Hills Wastewater Treatment Plant has affected cost figures for what Montville Township owes to use the facility, causing township officials to second-guess whether the lower sewer rates promised to ratepayers beginning in January can be put into effect.

The 16 million-gallon-per-day plant, which underwent renovations this year, serves Parsippany-Troy Hills, Montville, East Hanover, Mountain Lakes and a portion of Denville. Those municipalities share the cost of sewer service, paying a percentage of the total cost to service the sewage that goes through the plant based on what each town uses.

As part of the plant renovations, temporary meters with more advanced technology have been installed and showed one of the municipalities, Parsippany, brought less sewage through the plant than originally anticipated by the older meters. As a result, the cost burden will be shifted to the other communities, as each town's percentage of use is higher than what was anticipated when municipal budgets were developed.

Township Commiteeman Scott Gallopo summarized the issue and how it will impact Montville at Tuesday's Montville Township Commitee meeting.

"[Parsippany Utility's] expenses, as a result of their plant upgrades, have dropped significantly. Our percentge of the volume has gone up," he said.

Now Montville Township's portion of the cost could go up significantly, Gallopo said. But he said it was not something committee members could have known about ahead of time.

"You can't predict a change in the measure from a new flow meter," he said. "Even  the treatment plant never saw that coming."

Montville Township Administrator Victor Canning also said the township was unaware of the potential for the increased costs, particularly not when the township committee agreed to issue lower rates beginning next year.

"We didn't know this was going to happen," Canning said Friday. "We went on as if, in our world, everything was fine."

In June, township officials voted to give ratepayers a sewer fee "holiday" through the end of this year to return about $4 million in surplus money that was generated over the past several years. The township's Long Term Financial Planning Committee (LTFPC) also recommended that the township adopt , which was approved by the township committee in June.

Canning told the township committee Tuesday the lower rates may not be enough for Montville to pay the treatment plant what is needed now that the township's percentage of the cost burden has increased. The difference, which Canning said would now have to be budgeted for, is between $350,000 and $400,000.

"This isn't anything the township committee, the administration, or the [LTFPC] is at fault for," Canning said. "We didn't know it was out there, we didn't know it was coming until we were told and then, unfortunately, it was too late."

Canning noted that Parsippany Mayor James Barberio has promised to help the municipalities with the issue.

"Mayor Barberio has been very accommodating. He understands the dilemma, he has never ever suggested that if this turns out to be a financial issue, he would turn a blind eye on it," Canning said.

At Tuesday's meeting, Montville Mayor Tim Braden said the township committee will have to take some more time to figure out if the lower rates can still be put in effect. He commended the work Committeeman Jim Sandham and other township officials have done looking into the issue and said it will be discussed at future meetings.

"We probably weren't paying our fair share in the past and now we will in the future," he said. "We were on a 'holiday' for quite a while."

margot October 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Could someone give us break here in Montville. Of course there cant be lower rates! Why should there be when the township didnt know that the old meters werent reading the amount of water/sewage correctly! A new meter flow? And these were installed and we didnt know about it? Of course its a financial issue, what else could it be. We be pay exorbitant sewage rates as it is. No one will be able to live around here soon.
Liz Kril October 15, 2012 at 06:18 PM
This was the original reason why our sewage rates went up in the first place. They just want to charge whatever they want. I still say $50 for sewage and that's too much. They need excuses to use the excess payments for other projects.These people are unbelievable.
BooBooBear October 16, 2012 at 02:10 AM
Ed October 16, 2012 at 02:49 PM
Are we sure the flow numbers that Montville is being given are correct? Did anyone "check the figures" to make sure it is correct.... or do we just take Parsippany's word? Parrsippany is much larger than Montville and should have a higher usage. If we owe the money it should be paid but.. we should know it is really correct this time.
jf October 16, 2012 at 03:42 PM
What does our CFO do? Why are the numbers always a surprise to our committee??? We have a couple of CPA's on board. We either have too much money or not enough we take from Peter to pay Paul. This town is unaffordable and many will start moving and then what happens - the people who are left behind will really get hammered with real estate taxes because they'll be fewer people to tax. It's a joke. At one time we were forecasting a savings of $400,000 on positions (salaries) that had been vacated but were going to be filled. Then we went way over the salary budget for the CFO and that was just one of several positions where we were going to see the savings. I wonder how much over budget we went on filling those other positions. Budgets are important very important but it's not rocket science - I did it for many years for billion dollar companies. I can't understand why Montville has such a problem managing it's finances - somebody needs to be held accountable. Of course there will be deviations from what was forecasted, but how come we never come in under budget or why are we always surprised by the numbers??? There should be no surprises if expenses are being closely monitored on a regular basis.
Dan Grant October 16, 2012 at 11:10 PM
This issue has been floating around for almost 5 years now in one form or another. We have an alledged Long Term Financial Planning Committee and two CPA's and one "Financial Expert" on the Township Committee itself. First we were told that rates had to be raised and they were. Then "Suddenly" we developed a $4.8 Million surplus (take that as money they took from rate payers they didn't need.) They gave a "Holliday" to sewer rate payers of half that amount and kept the rest. They also have taken close to $1 million per year from rate payers to help make it appear that they were holding the line on taxes. Now we are told that because of new technology Parsippany has discovered that they use less of the system than they thought and now wants to assess the Towns that use their service a greater share of the costs. The Administrator's job is to make the people who hired him look as good as possible so he has answers for everything but it is the Committee's job to handle the finances of the Township and right now they aren't making his job easy. Have they met with Parsippany at the elected official level? Were they taken by suprise by this ? Back when they raised rates they claim they did it on bad information and now once again they are saying they didn't see this coming. What exactly do these people do as Elected Officials?
Dave F October 17, 2012 at 02:54 PM
You have completely lost the plot Dan. Perhaps you should read the minutes/ listen to the recordings from their meetings this year - all of your "questions" have been answered. Then again, if you did that your political narrative would ring hollow.....
jf October 17, 2012 at 04:34 PM
So Dave F, Dan and me have both jumped the gun with premature assessments of our committee and the lack of oversight. This isn't an isolated instance - it appears that much of the time they are reactive and not proactive. And it seems like we always have money for another park but not the things we really need.
Dave F October 17, 2012 at 05:05 PM
jf - You might have a better handle on some of these issues than I do, but I still don't see how they are "reactive" and not proactive. That's not the conclusion I reach when I attend the meetings and read the minutes/listen to the recordings, particularly on this sewer issue. They definitely blew the "we'll save $400,000 on positions" statements, but I think that came from one committee person and they should have corrected him publicly immediately. You are spot on regarding accountability. There is none, particularly inside town hall. This committee has done nothing to hold these individuals accountable for their mistakes, bad info, and lack of follow-through. Despite numerous complaints from some of the committee members, it's not clear to me why there is still a lack of accountability. Perhaps it is time for us to let them know how we feel at their next meeting.
jf October 17, 2012 at 07:53 PM
Dave F - no doubt you are better at attending meetings than I am and I think we would find a lot of people who would agree with us on the accountability issue. What I meant by being reactive vs. proactive - a proactive committee wouldn't be surprised on a routine basis because they would have done the due diligence on the front end to avoid being surprised by less than desirable end results. I'm a finance person and I just don't ever remember being surprised by the numbers, expenses, etc so much of the time - having a solid budget based on realistic and reasonable assumptions is a way to maintain a grasp on financial matters, monitor financial activity (actuals v. budget) and anticipate deviations while providing solutions to them in a timely fashion.
jf October 17, 2012 at 11:19 PM
But seriously, can someone tell me what the township CFO is supposed to be doing? Who is steering the ship?
Dan Grant October 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM
A review of what has happened shows the reactive nature of people who are not doing theirs jobs and I am not talking about the employees. In 2009 they raised rates because of what they claim was bad information, They began to accumulate a surplus but apparently were unaware of it until 2011 by which time they had a surplus of $4.8 million which is money taken from rate payers that they did not need to take. The surplus had grown over time and they should have seen that by the yearly audit which would have been seen growing every year. They could have lower the rates as soon as it was recognised. Instead they were suprised by it in 2011 and finally did something about it in 2012. What did they do? They gave a "vacation" to rate payers of less than half of the money, keeping the remaining $2.8 million. Now the rate reduction is being threatened by a higher bill from Parsippany and they are suprized by that. It doesn't speak well of a Township Committee that is on top of things.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something