To the editor:

Steubenville has a water infrastructure problem, and city leaders are faced with making some difficult decisions. However, the plan to raise water rates 70 percent is draconian and ill-advised.

How will the resident who is on a fixed income who sometimes decides between buying food or medicine afford the increase? How will Steubenville attract and retain businesses and residents when the average water bill will be 100 percent higher than Weirton’s? Why is two-thirds of the water produced by Steubenville unaccounted for? Why is $2 million needed to repair the water tanks that are only 15 years old? Prior water towers lasted years without major maintenance repairs. Were the tanks not properly maintained? If yes, why not and who is responsible?

Why does the rate plan hire more wastewater personnel? The 2015 State of Ohio Performance Audit concluded the city had excess personnel in wastewater. The rate plan includes the purchase of seven garbage packers at a cost of $1.3 million during a five-year period. That seems to be a luxury rather than a necessity. However, if the wear and tear on the packers is that great, then why has the city administration refused to examine changes in its garbage collection process that would prevent the packers from going to the landfill which would extend the life of the packers? The 2015 State of Ohio Performance Audit determined the sanitation department was overstaffed by two to six positions. Why haven’t those positions been transferred to the M&R Department, which is understaffed? This would reduce the sanitation operating expenses and lessen any water rate hike.

The city forecasts a declining customer base and increasing operating costs in its water system. If a business had a similar forecast, it would be headed to bankruptcy. It’s time the city explored consolidating its water system with Jefferson County.

What would be the rate increase if Steubenville consolidated its water system with the county’s system? Duplication of various overhead costs would be eliminated. Why hasn’t consolidation been explored before proposing a 70 percent rate increase? The city administration shows the water, sewer and sanitation funds operating at deficits. Yet, the city administration continues to negotiate yearly employee raises in these departments. Why are raises given when funds are operating at deficit levels?

Before raising rates, the city should answer all questions raised in this letter. The rate plan is too aggressive. It ignores loan forgiveness and possible grants. I suggest the city take a piece-meal approach to the problem and start with the water valve replacement. Maybe this can identify where the two-thirds of the unaccounted for water goes.

If successful, that should dramatically reduce the operating expenses. The city should work with OEPA. OEPA acknowledges the financial challenges faced by the city and its residents. I hope OEPA would not force a plan on the city that a sizable number of residents cannot afford, and I hope that council defeats the 70 percent rate increase and adopts a more reasonable plan.

Mike Johnson

Steubenville

(Editor’s note: Johnson is a former 2nd Ward councilman.)