PROPOSED REORGANIZATION OF WATER & SEWER

The Water Planning Group meeting Tuesday night was singularly disconcerting. A governance proposal for the reorganization of water & sewer was previously presented by the former town manager and discussed by the WPG with little opposition. I naively thought the auditor's same plan would receive the same preliminary acceptance. Instead it was met with outrage, indignation and rejection by the Commissioners as well as some, but not all, of the WPG members. What caused this furor? 
In addition to performing the forensic audit, the auditor was asked to provide a governance plan based on his review of how the enterprise funds had been managed. His recommendation creates a new position of superintendent reporting directly to the town manager, overseeing the contract operators of the plants as well as the consulting engineers, and suggests combining the commissions into one 5-member appointed and advisory board. This isn't a wild new concept: it's a successful model used by many municipalities and some of our neighboring towns. 
It's interesting to note that the 2004 MMA Report made the same recommendation which was soundly rejected by the then chair of the Water Commission. Two reports, 6-years apart, authored by two different independent professionals making basically the same recommendation evinced the identical reaction by our elected commissioners. Objective vs. subjective. You decide.
To me, this structure provides the town with a 9-5 professional; someone with engineering/utility management experience who could evaluate the consulting engineer's recommendations and would have department head budgetary accountability. It is sound business practice and it makes sense to put the onus on a paid professional rather than citizen volunteers.
The auditor also provided a proposal for how this might be paid for by reducing the scope of the plant operation contracts and contract services costs so as not to add additional costs to the Town. 
The MMA Report outlines a job description for a Municipal Infrastructure Manager, cites recommended minimum qualifications, describes the essential duties and responsibilities and, in my estimation, is a darn good place to start our discussion. 
However, it's hard to talk when you're holding your breath. I hope the naysayers will instead take a deep breath and enter into a conversation. What is needed now is solutions and the best solutions come from dispassionate debate.

BoS AGENDA: Monday, November 29

TAX CLASSIFICATION HEARING: The Assessors will present their report so the BoS can vote to set the tax rate for submission to the DOR
REVIEW OF EMERGENCY SELECTMEN'S MEETING 11-22: Recap of the discussion of implications of preliminary audit findings on immediate bond issues
SET DATE FOR 2011 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING & ELECTION
CULTURAL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
DISCUSSION OF INCREASE OF FACILITY STICKER FEE: proposed $10 increase
CAT DAM NOI DISCUSSION