Dean Calender, of the Conneaut Lake Joint Municipal Authority, and Sadsbury Township Supervisor Roy Whaley approached Conneaut Lake Borough Council for the first hour of the December meeting.

Calender stated that he wanted to bring to their attention some of the issues that had been unfolding between his authority, Conneaut Lake Joint Municipal Authority, (CLJMA), and the Municipal Authority of Conneaut Lake, (MACL).

CLJMA covers Sadsbury and Summit Townships and MACL services the Borough of Conneaut Lake.

(For the purposes of this report, the words, Borough Authority, will be used interchangeably with MACL.)

At past meetings, Whaley had broached the subject of the ongoing bickering on each side in terms of fees, old contracts and the joining of the two. The content of this meeting was along those same lines but Calender was on board to voice his views and concerns about the saga.

He began by reminding Council of a contract that had been signed by both in the mid 1980’s and continued by basically stating that the contract was outdated.

He said that, in his opinion, the contract had favored the borough to which Borough Council President Richard Holabaugh took slight issue. He followed by saying that it was simply a difference of opinion because the people in the borough felt just the opposite way.

Calender said they had a problem with a surcharge that has been applied since the time of the contract. He said this charge pertains to 79 customers, most of whom live on 285, west of town. He imparted that there is no infiltration of that line and it is closed.

He mentioned that they had to double the rate of said customers because CLJMA had been picking up that bill, so to speak, since the time that the contract began. He continued to state that it was not fair and that they couldn’t continue to pick up the cost.

Calender said that the surcharge was supposed to be temporary but he had been told that it would now continue on forever. He said if the surcharge were dropped, everything would be fine, more or less.

“We now have to take some sort of action to either renegotiate, go to court—do something, because we can’t live with it any longer. It’s not fair to those people on 285,” he said.

Holabaugh asked what exactly he was suggesting and Calender replied, “I’m just informing you that we are going to do the necessary things that we have to do.”

Holabaugh jumped in with, “I mean you’re not asking us...if we know or don’t know whether it’s legal or illegal or whether they are abiding by the contract or not abiding by the contract?” Calender said that they are abiding by the contract.

Holabaugh pressed further for exactly what he wished of Council and then Calender said he wanted them to know that they were going to take steps, in the very near future, to alleviate the problem.

Holabaugh said that he was going to play devil’s advocate and asked what would happen if the judge and all involved came to the conclusion that everything was fine with the activities on both sides, legally speaking.

It was at this point that Councilman Kribbs spoke up and tried to pin down the precise nature of the visit.

Kribbs more or less summed up what he had gotten of the conversation thus far. He said that he was gathering that Calender felt, in hindsight, that the contract was a bad deal for his side. Calender said it was a bad deal for both sides.

Kribbs then clarified that it was a legal and binding contract and that CLJMA wanted to be released from it. Calender said yes to both of those statements and indicated, again, that a new and improved contract would be the best route.

He said that if they would look at the contract in terms of how the borough pays its bill, it was “ridiculous.”

Holabaugh, as he had done in meetings past, reminded those in attendance that the borough is strictly a CLJMA customer, just like the Golden Dawn or any other business. Calender agreed with this and added that they feel that they too are customers of the borough.

More back and forth banter ensued and then the topic of metering the flow in and out of the borough was brought to light. Holabaugh thought that it would be a good course of action in order to figure out exactly what kind of usage is unfolding. Calender claimed that the Borough Authority was against that idea because the contract would not allow it.

Whaley spoke up at that point and said that the lawyer for the Borough Authority had written a letter in which he said that it wasn’t legal for a meter to be installed “to make specific factual data for future payments.”

Kribbs asked, once again, what he wanted Council to do and Calender said, “nothing” He reminded everyone that he was there to impart information.

This went back and forth for a long time with Mayor Tim Kaider chiming in with his concern that the tax payer would be the real loser in the whole deal. He also mentioned that this problem had been going on for a long time and now, they seem to be back to square one.

Former Borough Secretary Betty Sherman imparted some information as well. She said that in terms of the surcharge, everyone in the borough pays the much-discussed $20 surcharge. “So by imposing it on the people that are using the borough lines but don’t live in the borough but are using those lines, they are paying the same amount as the people that live in the borough. If they were to drop the surcharge from the other people that are using our lines, they should drop them for us too,” Sherman stated. She went on to say that she realized it was a good part of their income.

Calender’s response was to ask what they do with their money, to which Sherman said she didn’t know and he said he didn’t either.

The mayor asked the solicitor if the Authority’s financial statements were public documents and the answer was that they were. Jeff Millin, the solicitor, went on to say that it was, more than likely, part of the due diligence when a merger was the talk of the day. (This particular issue didn’t have anything to do with the merger, as Whaley, who spoke up soon thereafter, had said earlier.)

Back to the meter discussion, Sherman said she had attended a meeting at which an engineer had said that it would not be possible to monitor a high pressure line. Holabaugh said he didn’t believe that to be true and Calender said they monitor CLP all of the time. Sherman said she was just telling them what she heard.

The mayor said he had read of a case in PA where two authorities wouldn’t consolidate and it turned out that they dissolved them and started over. He said he didn’t want to get bogged down in lawsuits and the like, but expressed his concern over the two sides not agreeing on much of anything.

Whaley spoke next and basically gave a recap of what he had said at a previous meeting and also repeated some of the things that Calender had brought up as well.

He said that both sides are basically interpreting the contract in their own way and that there was a lot of arbitrary language involved in said contract. He said he would like to see the language updated and more clearly defined.

Holabaugh brought up the meter again and said that he had been told by an engineer that a meter would be placed in the region of the Catholic Church. According to Holabaugh, this did not come to fruition due to lack of funding for continuing the project. This had all taken place prior to the agreement being signed, back in the mid 80's.

Councilman Kribbs asked, once again, why the topic was being rehashed at each meeting and exactly what Whaley was asking of the borough. Whaley said again that they didn’t want the borough to do anything. He explained further that there were just different personalities clashing on both authorities and he felt Council needed to hear about this issue. Kribbs asked what the borough could do about that.

Whaley said that he wanted to see the supervisors, members of borough council and the two authorities start to meet on a regular basis. Kribbs pointed out that it would only take one, of the mentioned groups, to say no to the gatherings and that would be the end of that. Whaley said it was better than going to court.

Holabaugh piped in and said they don’t have the authority to tell the authority, so to speak, what to do. He was correct in his assessment, according to the solicitor.

Whaley continued to say that they should be able to update the language of the contract and put a time limit on it so it could be renewed from time to time. He went on to state that there isn’t anything in the current contract that allows for reviews.

Basically the things being carried out in the contract are legal but, Whaley questioned if they were moral or not.

He also quoted from a letter that said MACL would pause any new service. He said he was gathering that they were threatening to not allow any new customers on 285 to go through the system.

Holabaugh said that, in essence, without a meter, the Borough Authority wouldn’t really be able to tell if extra sewage were added.

Whaley said they would know because, as per the agreement, they have to notify the borough. Holabaugh said that wasn’t what he meant as he was referring to the fact that without a meter that measures gallons, they really would have no idea of knowing.

Whaley said that they wouldn’t know but the agreement states that CLJMA must notify MACL of any new service. In other words, the only way anyone would know for certain would be if the contract were followed. Because there is no real way of measuring any added sewage, due to the lack of a meter, no one could really tell if a new customer utilized the line. That was the point that Holabaugh appeared to be making.

Whaley went back to what the mayor had mentioned earlier about the case in PA concerning disbanding, so to speak, two authorities and starting from scratch. He said that it was time for something to be done because they had gone on long enough doing their own things. He mentioned on numerous occasions how “something had to be done.”

Kribbs said that he had only been involved in two meetings thus far and, at both of them, this had been a major topic, with no real results or requests. “You can’t just keep doing this over and over every time we have a Council meeting.”

Whaley answered by going back to that letter which stated that service would be paused for new customers.

Kribbs said that quoting Mr. Ferguson, attorney for the borough crew, was really a disservice because he, Ferguson,was doing nothing more than speaking for the Borough Authority.

The mayor said that basically the town Authority was maintaining an old system and, had they agreed to the joining of the two, they would have been able to get money from the state for repairs.

Whaley said that the Borough Authority was using sewer money to fix up the water system. This is above the board and, as Holabaugh pointed out, there had been high levels of arsenic in the system and the need was for that repair to take place prior to any other.

Holabaugh began to wind the topic down, since it had taken up a good chunk of time, by saying that he was going to gather as much information as possible from both the attorney and the chairperson of the Municipal Authority of Conneaut Lake and hear their side of the issue.

He said he would then impart that info to Whaley and perhaps the two of them could figure out where to go from there.

Whaley said he agreed, to a point, and, once again, brought up his idea of having the entities involved get together.

Councilwoman Penny Monahan interjected her view at that point and stated that they would not have the power to promote change but it would be a citizen’s input only. Whaley said he wanted to sit in and make sure progress was made as, according to him, it was either that or some kind of litigation.

Some light banter continued for a bit with a lot of rehashing of statements made earlier in the meeting. Then, after 58 minutes, that subject came to a close.

A few noteworthy points were gathered by the Community News from Richard Holabaugh after the meeting.

According to Holabaugh the following is helpful information:

1. An authority can get grants and loans that a municipality cannot.

2. Supervisors appoint people to serve on the CLJMA and Borough Council appoints members of the Municipal Authority of Conneaut Lake. However, they may not tell either authority what to do.

3. Supervisors and Councilmen cannot actively influence either authority as it is illegal to do so.

4. The borough was told to fix their water system by the DEP, (Department of Environmental Protection).

5. The borough is a customer of CLJMA and a customer doesn’t usually pay a percentage of *capital expenditures. However, the borough does do this. The readings are estimated but, the difference of said readings is the percentage of the capital expenditures.

For example, if a new building is needed, the borough pays a percentage of the cost.

Holabaugh said that he had not had an opportunity to get with the Borough Authority to check out what had been said about them at the meeting. By press time, this very well may have unfolded.

*Web definition of capital expenditures is: the cost of long term improvements; funds spent by a company to acquire or upgrade a long-term asset.