Water water everywhere, and you will pay for it darn it.

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Requesting analysis by @NorthBeachPerso, or anyone else that can explain what is happening with Calvert's Water Service. It appears to me that the County wants to charge extra EDU's after the fact to existing homeowners, and, that initially, water usage per EDU was way underestimated, and the County wants to give the shaft to those that go above and beyond their monthly allotment of water by charging for extra EDU's. If a household exceeds their monthly allotment of water, why not just charge the customer whatever cents per gallon is in excess? Inquiring minds and all that. Especially since it appears that she has gotten a hold of 7News On Your Side to do an investigative news story.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/po...XDEyYsRv9KR6mKSvfmrl&show_text=true&width=500"

Her facebook page with more information .... https://www.facebook.com/sherri.magaraciverdon
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
I really don't know what Calvert is doing but I can maybe opine on a couple things.

EDU's are assigned when there's no metering, that's why you can't add additional specific charges per gallon.

We did EDU's here when we didn't have a water system but did have sewer. Each use had a formula that the charges were based on. A restaurant, for example, had its sewer charges flat fee based on the number of seats. That fee would have been higher than a retail store selling books. Beauticians were assessed by the number of chairs, etc.

Houses were based on bedrooms and bathrooms. If I remember the base sewer charge was based on a 3BR/2BA house (although at that time most houses didn't have that second bathroom and many didn't have the third bedroom).

Charging by EDU's is a real blunt instrument for figuring charges, although you still use them when sizing the water and sewer system and calculating capacity (ex: a house uses about 250 gallons/day with 3/4 people. You then factor out your capacity from that.

It sounds as though the County did an audit to ascertain if any one has added a mother in law unit or added bathrooms in order to adjust the charges.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

I really don't know what Calvert is doing but I can maybe opine on a couple things.

EDU's are assigned when there's no metering, that's why you can't add additional specific charges per gallon.

We did EDU's here when we didn't have a water system but did have sewer. Each use had a formula that the charges were based on. A restaurant, for example, had its sewer charges flat fee based on the number of seats. That fee would have been higher than a retail store selling books. Beauticians were assessed by the number of chairs, etc.

Houses were based on bedrooms and bathrooms. If I remember the base sewer charge was based on a 3BR/2BA house (although at that time most houses didn't have that second bathroom and many didn't have the third bedroom).

Charging by EDU's is a real blunt instrument for figuring charges, although you still use them when sizing the water and sewer system and calculating capacity (ex: a house uses about 250 gallons/day with 3/4 people. You then factor out your capacity from that.

It sounds as though the County did an audit to ascertain if any one has added a mother in law unit or added bathrooms in order to adjust the charges.

But but but .... you're supposed to know about everything that happens in Calvert. : )

So, the County did it backwards? From my understating, a developer, or homeowner building a house, is charged for each required house/dwelling EDU when the permits are pulled when building so the house can be connected to the water and septic service. I believe this falls under the impact fees? Then to bill for actual water usage. In this case, it seems the County is trying to charge again/extra for an another physical connection when the house is already connected.

Either way, it appears those employed by the County have no clue as to what they are doing. And barring any public hearing on the matter, the County has no legal standing to charge any homeowner for any extra EDU's after the fact, after the home is built and an occupancy permit issued. At least to my understanding anyway.
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
For your consideration ...



But but but .... you're supposed to know about everything that happens in Calvert. : )

So, the County did it backwards? From my understating, a developer, or homeowner building a house, is charged for each required house/dwelling EDU when the permits are pulled when building so the house can be connected to the water and septic service. I believe this falls under the impact fees? Then to bill for actual water usage. In this case, it seems the County is trying to charge again/extra for an another physical connection when the house is already connected.

Either way, it appears those employed by the County have no clue as to what they are doing. And barring any public hearing on the matter, the County has no legal standing to charge any homeowner for any extra EDU's after the fact, after the home is built and an occupancy permit issued. At least to my understanding anyway.
Ok, I just read her Facebook page.

During the site plan/permitting phase water/sewer tap fees are paid. They're part of the cost of building a house/building in the County that has access to water/sewer. They're separate from the excise fees (used to be called impact fees) that go to schools, roads and recreation.

I'd have to see her bill to figure it out. Water and sewer charges have two parts usually (full disclosure, I don't know how the County breaks its bills out). The two parts consist of usage charges and benefit charges. The usage charges are what it means-the cost of supplying/treating the water and sewage. It also goes to maintenance and upkeep of the system unless that's a capital expense (new pumps are capital, repairs are not)

Benefit charges are to pay off the bonds used to construct the system, rebuild the system, the upgrades needed to meet new regulations (Enhanced Nutrient Removal is an example. The estimates for that were off, from both the EPA and MD Department of the Environment by a factor of 2 or 3 times. The bonds for that are what the Flush Tax funds).

It may be that her water/sewer area had some capital improvements done (new water tank, new treatment equipment) which would increase the benefit charge. Also, all users on the system are on the hook to pay those benefit charges, there is no division between "legacy" users and "new" users.

Also, the addition of another dwelling like an apartment in the basement, a mother in law cottage, etc. can trigger the imposition of another tap fee. The theory there is that an EDU is being added and adding users to the system. The County is a bit looser for those on excise (impact) fees but not much.

The cost of water and sewer treatment, to include equipment, chemicals, etc., has skyrocketed over the last several years. North Beach didn't raise water rates for over ten years so now the bills steadily increase every year. They weren't raised for political reasons so now the increases are larger than if they'd been raised a little bit each year. The end result would have been the same but not as jarring. Calvert may be doing the same thing, not raising rates for years and now playing catch up.

I think the County does the same thing as North Beach and divorces Water/Sewer charges from the General Fund and puts them into what's called an Enterprise Fund. Trash fees have the same accounting. The reason to do that is because, in theory, the elected officials can't "borrow" money from the Enterprise Funds to fund General Fund expenditures with the promise to "replace them next year". If there's anything most elected officials can't stand is having money laying around in a fund earmarked for something and not being spent. O'Malley did that with the Highway User Funds and State Pension System money. That's why Hogan tried to replace it over his eight years, so much was taken out by O'Malley even the fixed spending couldn't be covered let alone anything new.

Thank you for the compliment but the reality is that I've backed out of my "community" stuff the last three or four years. I was involved in one way or another for over thirty years and it was time to let others get involved.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Ok, I just read her Facebook page.

During the site plan/permitting phase water/sewer tap fees are paid. They're part of the cost of building a house/building in the County that has access to water/sewer. They're separate from the excise fees (used to be called impact fees) that go to schools, roads and recreation.

I'd have to see her bill to figure it out. Water and sewer charges have two parts usually (full disclosure, I don't know how the County breaks its bills out). The two parts consist of usage charges and benefit charges. The usage charges are what it means-the cost of supplying/treating the water and sewage. It also goes to maintenance and upkeep of the system unless that's a capital expense (new pumps are capital, repairs are not)

Benefit charges are to pay off the bonds used to construct the system, rebuild the system, the upgrades needed to meet new regulations (Enhanced Nutrient Removal is an example. The estimates for that were off, from both the EPA and MD Department of the Environment by a factor of 2 or 3 times. The bonds for that are what the Flush Tax funds).

It may be that her water/sewer area had some capital improvements done (new water tank, new treatment equipment) which would increase the benefit charge. Also, all users on the system are on the hook to pay those benefit charges, there is no division between "legacy" users and "new" users.

Also, the addition of another dwelling like an apartment in the basement, a mother in law cottage, etc. can trigger the imposition of another tap fee. The theory there is that an EDU is being added and adding users to the system. The County is a bit looser for those on excise (impact) fees but not much.

The cost of water and sewer treatment, to include equipment, chemicals, etc., has skyrocketed over the last several years. North Beach didn't raise water rates for over ten years so now the bills steadily increase every year. They weren't raised for political reasons so now the increases are larger than if they'd been raised a little bit each year. The end result would have been the same but not as jarring. Calvert may be doing the same thing, not raising rates for years and now playing catch up.

I think the County does the same thing as North Beach and divorces Water/Sewer charges from the General Fund and puts them into what's called an Enterprise Fund. Trash fees have the same accounting. The reason to do that is because, in theory, the elected officials can't "borrow" money from the Enterprise Funds to fund General Fund expenditures with the promise to "replace them next year". If there's anything most elected officials can't stand is having money laying around in a fund earmarked for something and not being spent. O'Malley did that with the Highway User Funds and State Pension System money. That's why Hogan tried to replace it over his eight years, so much was taken out by O'Malley even the fixed spending couldn't be covered let alone anything new.

Thank you for the compliment but the reality is that I've backed out of my "community" stuff the last three or four years. I was involved in one way or another for over thirty years and it was time to let others get involved.

Thank you much for the insight. Maybe you should sign up with the County as a consultant? And then be our go-to guy for questions that need answering. 👍
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
I forgot to mention one real important thing about Enterprise Funds, they're supposed to be stand-alone/self-supporting and not receive any funds from the General Fund. That's because the Enterprise Funds fund specific things (water/sewer for example) and not everyone on the property tax roles is connected to the system.

That usually works out if the rates are realistic and keep up with increased costs.
 

GregV814

Well-Known Member
I know 5-6 people/business owners that have had their wells dug deeper. It isn't cheep. I often wonder how much longer it will be before the aquifer's/veins drop. Then what.
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
You're going to see that more (it's been happening up here for years), the older shallow wells go dry because the aquifer dropped so now you have to go deeper for the new well.

The Calvert Commissioners screwed the pooch when North Beach put in its water system thirty years ago. They were asked to participate and tie in the houses, both existing and proposed, outside the Town limits and they declined. Now people out there weekly ask the Town to extend water to them which is usually declined when they hear the cost (water tap plus construction cost to run the line).

The County tried to get cute several years ago and inserted a paragraph into the Water Service Plan that Town would be required to provide service and have Town residents pick up the capital costs. It was caught and subsequently removed.

 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

Thinking I might have figured it out. Calvert says each EDU is equivalent to 200 gallons per day for a family household. However they do not define the number of people in a household. The US Geological Survey puts the average consumption at 80-100 gallons per person per day. So a family of 4 would have an estimated use of up to 400 gallons per day, or 36000 gallons per quarter, rather than the 18000 the County says each household is allotted. If/when a home is/was built and was/is to be connected to the County's water/sewer service, the EDU calculations should have been based on the number of rooms and baths at application. So a one bedroom one bath would be for an estimated one person at 200 gallons per day, one EDU, and a four bedroom three bath home might be sized for 4-5 occupants which would be up to 1000 gallons per day, 5 EDU's. The County should have allotted the proper number of EDU's per potential household size from the very beginning, and not just the one EDU regardless of the size of the house.

It appears what the Calvert's Water Service people are trying to screw over families because of their incompetence.

Here is her latest post regarding the hearing tomorrow ...

"*Correction made to original post
🚨
FOR TUESDAYS BOCC MEETING WATER SEWER TOPIC
🚨
The focus of Tues BOCC meeting should not only be the abhorrent roll out of the bills. Please understand that while everything about their implementation of the bill was wrong and horrible and quite possibly illegal (no notice, no appeal process, audit occurred during covid, no opportunity to monitor consumption prior, no knowledge of threshold of 18,000 gallons per quarter, unexplained deviations in usage reporting and billing, etc) , that cannot be the main point that we bring forward. THE MAIN POINT THAT NEEDS TO BE EMPHASIZED is not that this was executed poorly. It’s that it should not have been done whatsoever. This 2016 resolution (sited at the top of every letter received) was not intended for residential. I can see from the 2016 interoffice memo that there was no fiscal impact because it was supposed to be commercial and developer accounts, and they were supposed to make the fund whole after the audit.
So this went from no fiscal impact and intended for business/commercial consumers and NEW residential consumers - and then changed to being targeted at EXISTING residential consumers retroactively.

THE QUESTION FOR THE BOCC IS : Who was behind the change? Doesn’t this type of change require a public vote? And why is there now a desperate (apparently) need for additional revenue at all costs? Especially when there is no fiscal impact?
They are destroying people financially for what?

All that will attend Tuesday, please don’t lose focus of the main point. If the rollout is the central issue, they will just fix how they roll it out and do it again PER THE AGENDA for Tues meeting. ****This link is for the presentation that they will give Tues - note! It shows, as I said, they want to pause, roll it out properly and then do it again.
https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/.../EDU..."

Here is the resolution she is referring ...


1673287708670.png
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
Assessing for potential number of residents would be damn near unworkable. The 80-100 gallons/day/person with a 200 gallon/day/household works out to be an average. I just ran the numbers for me and it worked out to 85 gallons/day/person or 255 gallons/day total, which is inside the estimate. There are houses which use twice that (23,000 gallons) in a quarter. The highest use I ever saw for a house was 30 years ago when the water system was first put in, 100,000 gallons in the quarter. Every fixture and pipe joint in the house leaked and the (grown) children would wash their cars and drive away leaving the hose running.

One kink in the calculations is that the assumption is that everyone has low-flow fixtures. Many people, like me, don't. Just about the only low-flow appliance is the HE washer.
 

Sneakers

Just sneakin' around....
I'd get killed with those assumptions. 4 bedrooms, 3 full baths. 1 occupant. I don't use anywhere near those estimates.
 

NorthBeachPerso

Honorary SMIB
Here are a couple news reports:

The first is a video, the second written.

There are a couple things that don't make sense:
Usually when billing is done using the EDU method there's no meter (the provider will know how much was sent out but not to an individual location unless that's the only) so I don't know how a determination was made that people were using 120% of their allotment, unless that's an average for all the houses in a development.

Then connection fees were mentioned. Those are paid upfront (or at least 1/3 of it is) at building permit issuance.

Now the audit. Go back to the above about connection fees. There was a time that the County didn't know how many houses were on the Chesapeake Beach Treatment Plant for sewer. The Health Department imposed a building moratorium on North Beach due to the Town's capacity allotment was used up. It turned out that the County, and Health Department, didn't have a lot of the houses built outside of the Town (their sewage goes through North Beach pipes to the treatment plant) on their records as being hooked into sewer. When I say "a lot" it was a couple hundred. Obviously someone at the County level had screwed up.

I wonder if that's what happened here.
 

Kinnakeet

Well-Known Member
I know 5-6 people/business owners that have had their wells dug deeper. It isn't cheep. I often wonder how much longer it will be before the aquifer's/veins drop. Then what.
The more homes,buildings and roads get built the water cannot get back into the ground to replenish the aquifers is what I have been told by the well drilling companies
 
Top