Who’s going to end up paying a $22,125 bill for switching four Oxford businesses on M-24 from village to township water?
Ask township officials and they feel the village should pick up the tab, not the property owners or township water users.
‘I think (the village has) all the responsibility in the world for this,? said Supervisor Bill Dunn, who was directed, along with Treasurer Joe Ferrari, by the township board last week to write a letter to the village seeking payment in full.
Back in February, a village main that supplied water to four township businesses on the east side of M-24 ? Complete Auto Repair, Burger King, Red Carpet Keim and Hubbard Spring Co. ? broke due to a combination of age and freezing weather.
According to Dunn, when he met with village representatives back then, they said this was the second time this water main had broken in two years and the municipality didn’t want to keep paying for its repair.
This same 4-inch main, probably installed sometime in the 1930s, ruptured in February 2006 and cost the village $7,900 to repair.
As a result, the supervisor said village representatives indicated they were no longer willing to supply water to these four township businesses, leaving the township no choice but to connect them to its system.
‘The village did not want to hook them up,? Dunn said.
But village Manager Joe Young and DPW Superintendent Don Brantley said the village did not refuse to continue providing water to those township businesses. They said it was a mutual decision made at a meeting the morning after the break was discovered.
‘It was a joint decision, that I recall,? said Young. ‘We all agreed that that would make the most sense for everyone concerned. That was my recollection.?
‘I think it was more an agreement,? Brantley said. ‘The village would have continued supplying water, if the township said, ‘At this time, we’re not going to hook up those township businesses.??
It would have cost the village another $7,900 to repair the broken main or $40,000-$50,000 to replace the main and install new service pipes to the businesses, according to Brantley.
The village couldn’t see spending all that money since the township was planning to supply water to those businesses at some point in the future.
So, Brantley and Young said it was mutually decided to disconnect the businesses from the village and hook them up to the township system.
‘It made good sense because the line is in such bad condition,? Young said.
The Oakland County Drain Commissioner’s Office, which maintains and operates the township water system, had their workers bore under M-24 and connect the businesses to a 12-inch township main on the west side of the road.
The cost for doing all this was $20,281 plus another $1,844 for new water meters because the ones used by the county and village are not compatible for reading purposes.
‘I don’t think there was really any issue of who was going to pay for what,? Brantley said. ‘We didn’t say ‘who’s going to pay for this,? it was just a plan of action to get these customers back on line.?
‘It was decided at that time to get them hooked up and worry about who pays for it later,? Dunn said.
Now, it’s later.
Dunn doesn’t believe the property/business owners should be charged.
‘I can’t see charging any of them any money at all,? he said.
The supervisor said the village should pay for the whole thing because they’re the ones who decided to stop providing those businesses with water after the owners had paid the village tap fees to hook up to their system years ago, then paid user fees for many years after that.
Township officials previously agreed to waive the standard $6,075 per REU tap-in fee normally charged to users who connect to their water system.
The supervisor questioned the legality of the village’s actions, given the property owners had been paying into the village system all these years.
‘I don’t think it’s legal for the village to say, ‘We’re not going to service you anymore because our lines are breaking down,?? he said.
Trustee Pat Fitchena agreed.
‘I don’t know how (the village) can legally do that, if the bills were paid,? she said. ‘There was no notice, they just went ahead and did it.?
Bellairs didn’t mind asking the village to pay, however regardless of the response, she doesn’t believe township water users should be obligated to pay for hooking these businesses up to the system.
‘I don’t think it’s fair to the 3,000 people on township water now,? she said. ‘I’m not willing to give anybody anything at the expense of other people.?
Bellairs said the businesses are ‘out there making profits? that could help pay for their hookups.
Average taxpayers don’t have that advantage. ‘They’re not making any profits and they have to pick up the tab, I don’t think that’s fair,? she said.
Dunn said it’s a ‘very complicated issue? and ‘I want to do what’s right for everyone.?