Culpeper takes another crack at water-sewer cooperation

The long stagnant idea of allowing easy access to water and sewer service for all of Culpeper elicited cursing, stall tactics, political posturing and finally, court action — this year alone.

Culpeper Town Council, the entity holding most of the utility assets, and Culpeper County Board of Supervisors, the entity that needs access to it, have been chipping away at water and sewer and how to share it since the late 1980s.

Culpeper’s two governments take another crack at water and sewer cooperation at a joint meeting tonight, but whether that can be achieved is anyone’s guess.

The meeting starts at 5:30 in room 221 of Germanna’s Daniel Technology Center.

It was advertised as taking place in open and closed session, depending on the will of the combined 17 politicians.

Supervisors Bill Chase and Tom Underwood and Councilman Steve Jenkins have said they would not support going into closed session.

“I feel like anything I have to say on this, I can say it in public,” said Chairman Chase, who consistently votes against closed session meetings.

More background
The specific topic of discussion for tonight’s meeting is an amendment to a 2003 water and sewer agreement in which the town agreed to sell water and sewer connections to the county that it could then resell to customers beyond the town’s limits.

The six-year-old contract had been implemented somewhat successfully until recently when the county took the position that the town was charging exorbitant connection fees.

The town countered by saying the county couldn’t expect to purchase such a large share in its system without investing what it had over many years.

After the county attempted several times to meet with the town to clarify the issue, but was basically ignored, the county filed a court action against the town in April asking a Culpeper judge to interpret the 2003 agreement.

Since then, public dialogue on water and sewer between the two groups of elected officials has dried up although behind the scenes the respective staffs have been working to settle the matter out of court.

What’s at issue now?
In a joint statement Wednesday, County Administrator Frank Bossio and Town Manager Jeff Muzzy said the proposed change to the 2003 agreement provides “settlement provisions” for the county’s lawsuit in addition to “future actions related to a boundary line adjustment.”

Allowing the town to grow its borders into the county has long been a sticking point for both sides, but last summer at the Daniel Technology Center it seemed an agreement on the matter had finally been reached.

By majority — but not unanimous vote — the county agreed to let the town grow geographically and the town agreed to join the county’s water and sewer authority, bringing with it considerable assets. But that’s where the progress stopped.

The town and county hope to revive some level of talks in that direction tonight.

“I am going into it very optimistically,” said Jenkins on Wednesday. “I would like to think the town and county can once and for all move past some of the barriers that have existed in the past.”

Quid pro quo
Likewise, Town Councilman Duke duFrane said he was enthusiastic an agreement could be reached.

“There is almost unanimous support among council to do the agreement,” he said Tuesday.

In meeting with the county, duFrane added, the town hoped “to make disappear” the pending court action. At the heart of the matter, he said, is an equal exchange of land for utilities.

“There has to be some quid pro quo,” duFrane said. “Town Council is not going to just give up the citizens’ assets without something in return.”

But Chairman Chase, always an unwilling voice for boundary line adjustment, said he didn’t see what the county would gain in the deal.

“Why would we give away land to have the town join an independent body that we will have no control over?” he said.

“We don’t stand to gain whether the town goes in or doesn’t go in,” Chase said adding, the county was not trying to “make a profit.”

At the same time, he “reluctantly” conceded he would support some area of boundary line adjustment as outlined at last summer’s meeting. Per that scenario, the town would grow mostly in the commercial corridor along Bus. 29 north of downtown in an area where many county businesses are on town water and sewer.

Chase held the boundary line, however, on the McDevitt Drive area encompassing Terremark and Germanna, an area he said the county done an excellent job in planning as “a very solid industrial park.”

“To see it just given away to the town and botched up with houses in the future, no.”

Majority rules
Supervisor Underwood hoped for “constructive conversation” at tonight’s meeting “to move us forward on this issue.” He supported making a binding agreement out of last summer’s vote for a utility authority and boundary line adjustment. But Underwood stopped short of saying it would happen.

“I hope a regional water and sewer authority can be formed, but I do not know if one will be formed,” he said Wednesday. “I do believe water and sewer will be available to county businesses needing such services in the near future.”

Jenkins said majority should rule in the matter.

“Individual members of a board or council shouldn’t be able to hold up an entire process,” he said of his impression that the matter was worked out at last summer’s meeting.

“I don’t understand why we haven’t been able to move faster and constantly keep getting caught up in the mud.”

Open or closed?
DuFrane, known for his colorful comments, said he would support going into closed session tonight to iron out the details.

Why? “So people won’t grandstand in front of the press,” he said Tuesday, referencing a comment he made earlier this year at a town-county interaction committee meeting about “16 jackasses” getting together to sit in a room, “bray at each other and not get anything accomplished.”

Councilman Chris Snider said in an e-mail Wednesday some of the discussion should take place in closed session and some in open session. He declined further comment on the purpose of tonight’s meeting, saying, “I would hate to say anything to jeopardize this incredibly sensitive negotiation.

“Resolving this issue is of critical importance for the future of Culpeper,” Snider said.

Bossio and Muzzy, in their statement, said the law allows the governing bodies to enter closed session, if so desired, to discuss the pending lawsuit and possible boundary adjustment.

“With that said, the meeting will initially convene in open session and then it will be up to the two governing bodies to decide if the discussion will be held in open or closed session. Closed sessions have also been added in the event that a need for a ‘caucus’ should arise.”

Want to go?
The Culpeper County Board of Supervisors and Culpeper Town Council meet tonight at 5:30 in room 221 of Germanna’s Daniel Technology Center. The meeting is open to the public, but could be closed at some point.