How can CT D.E.P. influence development decisions?  "Responsible Growth" is Year 2007's attempt...ongoing!

Town set for sewer showdown
Greenwich TIME
By Neil Vigdor, Staff Writer
Published January 22 2008

Town officials are bracing for a possible showdown tomorrow night with North Mianus property owners upset over the individual cost to them for a major sewer installation project in their neighborhood.

The Condemnation Commission will hold a 7 p.m. public hearing at Central Middle School to discuss the formula it used for determining individual shares of the estimated $23.5 million project, which was completed in 2004.  A number of the 800 homeowners who received sewer hookups have publicly complained about the formula, as well as some of the expenses that were included in the overall cost of the project.

"I think there are going to be some people who are going to be angry based on what I'm hearing on the street," said Sam Romeo, head of the Mianus Valley Association, a homeowners group in the neighborhood.

The formula developed by the commission calls for 75 percent of the project's costs to be divided evenly among those with new hookups, with the remaining 25 percent to be calculated based on individual property tax assessments.  That works out to an average of $30,379 for individual homeowners, who will have 20 years to pay for their share of the project.

Romeo said the commission's formula overcharges those with smaller homes. The commission expected to hear from a pair of condominium associations that each received a single connection that allowed them to tie-in to a new sewer main built during the project. The condo associations, whose shares are five times higher than for individual homeowners, have said they should be charged less because they are already paying sewer taxes. Previously, the two developments had their own private sewer line and pump that they payed to maintain.

"We've had to go out and get counsel because the double-taxation is nothing we want to participate in," said Charles McConnell, the president of the Lansing Meadows Condominium Association.

The 24-unit development has been paying sewer improvement and maintenance taxes since it was built 24 years ago, according to McConnell.

"The way they've gone about it is just ignoring the historical facts about the situation," McConnell said. "They might just think that because we're 24 homeowners, we'll roll over."

Robert Tuthill, the commission's chairman, said the town needs to start billing homeowners and collecting their payments so it can repay the debt from the project.  While the commission could change the formula, Tuthill said that would require another public hearing and possibly delay a billing date scheduled for April 1.

"That would be my perception that it's unlikely the formula would be changed," Tuthill said. "Basically, the commission feels comfortable with what we did."

Tuthill said he doesn't know what to expect at tomorrow's hearing, where speakers will be encouraged to keep their comments under three minutes.

"I'm going to try to make it move along," Tuthill said. "We're here to hear what the public has to say. We want to make sure everyone gets a chance."

An even bigger gripe for Romeo is the overall bill for the project, which he said the town padded with unnecessary paving and drainage improvement projects in the neighborhood.

First Selectman Peter Tesei pointed out that the town audited the project and ended up lowering its overall price by $600,000, which had been spent on rebidding and redesigning the project when the original contractor had to be replaced.

"I think every effort was made to be fair and balanced," Tesei said. "I don't know what more at this point can be done."

Romeo said members of his group are particularly frustrated because almost all of the town officials responsible for the project have since retired or taken jobs elsewhere.

"Definitely, I think we're going to have to wind up (resorting to) litigation," Romeo said.
Water authority increases rates
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Doug Dalena, Staff Writer
Published September 8 2007

STAMFORD - Sewer users in the city and in Darien will see a 2.2 percent increase on their semiannual bills beginning next month.

The Water Pollution Control Authority voted after a public hearing Thursday night to raise user charges from $2.96 to $3.03 per 100 cubic feet - or 748 gallons - of water used. At its Magee Avenue plant, the authority treats sewage from about 95 percent of Stamford homes and buildings south of the Merritt Parkway, as well as from Darien; it charges customers for sewer use based on water consumption.

The average four-person household uses about 84,000 gallons of water per year, so that household would pay $7.84 more this year, WPCA Executive Director Jeanette Brown said. Customers will see the increase next month, when they receive the first of two bills.

Brown had originally proposed a 4.4 percent increase, to $3.09 per 100 cubic feet, but during a meeting before Thursday night's public hearing, board members voted to increase the projected collection rate for sewer bills, which alleviated the need for a higher hike.

Some board members had argued for reducing the increase by using $250,000 from a $1 million reserve account created specifically to hold rates down, but the board rejected that plan.

"You've got to have cash, because this is all supported by user fees," city Director of Administration Sandra Dennies said, adding that the reserve account must remain intact for unforeseen costs, such as utility bill spikes. "You can't go back to the city and ask for more money."

The WPCA operates the treatment plant and sanitary sewer system with revenues from sewer user fees, as well as connection fees for new users and assessments from neighborhoods that are added to the sewer system. Its budget is separate from the city's, although it has to be approved by the city Board of Representatives and Board of Finance.

City Rep. John Boccuzzi, D-2, and Director of Operations Ben Barnes, both WPCA board members, argued that holding down rates, as long as it was done responsibly, also was important, especially when ratepayers are experiencing increases in electricity, water and tax rates.

Boccuzzi suggested that WPCA board members may be insulated from criticism.

"They don't get the feedback that we get," he said.

Instead of using the reserve fund, members agreed to increase the projected collection rate from 95 percent to 97 percent, adding more money to the revenue side of the WPCA budget.

The authority's billing director, Bill Napolitano, told the board that collection rates in the last two years have approached 98 percent.

"We're at least a couple of points over what we projected for the budget," Napolitano said.

None of the four residents who attended the public hearing spoke about the rate increase.

Instead, the speakers complained about the hearing location - in a conference room at the sewage treatment plant - and the difficulty in finding it.

"Why aren't you having a meeting that is of public interest in a public building?" asked Sheila Carmine, who spoke about errors on her bill.

Brown said that while the legal notice printed in The Advocate included the address for the treatment plant, it should have included a map. Notices for some hearings on sewer connection charges and assessments for sewer construction projects have included maps, she said.

"From now on, we will hold all public hearings at the Government Center," Brown said. Regular board meetings will remain at the WPCA headquarters.

The public notice also included a proposed 6 percent rate increase, instead of the 4.4 percent Brown proposed at Thursday's meeting. That was because the WPCA agreed on a preliminary rate in August, when it prepared the public notice. At the time, Brown said the Aquarion water company had not provided the most recent water consumption figures because it was updating its computer system.

Brown also said she would look into why WPCA meeting minutes, agendas and notices of public hearings are not posted on the city's Web site.

Several months ago, Brown said the WPCA would start putting agendas and minutes online, but that hasn't happened.

Barnes, Brown's boss, was discouraged that meeting information was not online.

Freeland’s new sewers could cost $15 million; Hook-up charges could cost property owners from $6,400 to $284,400
South Whidbey Record
BY BRIAN KELLY AND SPENCER WEBSTER
Feb 16 2008

FREELAND — A new sewer system for Freeland will cost $15 million, according to a consultant’s memo prepared last week for the Freeland Water and Sewer District.

Most of the money to pay for the project would come from Island County. The memo lists County Rural Sales Tax revenues as a source for $6 million of the money needed to build the sewer system. Other funding would come from a $1 million grant from the county and a $1 million Centennial Clean Water Fund grant from the state.

Most of the money needed to pay for the rest of the project would come from a low-interest Public Works Trust Fund loan.

According to the memo, the sewer district has been studying three options for financing the project over the next two decades. The options include raising millions of dollars in hook-up fees assessed to property owners, and creating a local improvement district where property owners would help share in the cost of creating the new sewer system.

Depending on the financing option that is eventually chosen, property owners in Freeland could pay connection charges ranging from $6,400 up to $284,400.  Connection charges would be based on the amount of treatment capacity needed by each property owner, measured by the equivalent of a residential home.  The sewer system’s biggest users would pay the highest sewer hook-up fees. Topping the list is China City ($284,400), followed by Island Athletic Club ($260,700), Pay-Less ($205,400) and Nichols Brothers Boat Builders, Inc. ($158,000).

Customers would also pay monthly maintenance-and-operation rates that would cost between $37 and $44 for each equivalent residential unit, starting in 2011.  Steve Shapiro, the owner of the Island Athletic Club, was pretty shocked when he heard rumors of what his connection fees might be. His view didn’t change when told of the connection charge for his property that was listed in the sewer memo.

“That’s absurd. We have a rather new, functioning septic system and if we had to pay that kind of money, we’d go out of business,” Shapiro said.

“That is a quarter million dollar hookup fee for no benefit, because we have a system that works fine,” he said.

Freeland Chamber of Commerce officials familiar with the report could not be reached for comment by presstime Friday morning.  Sewer district commissioners met earlier this week to talk about the study. District representatives also briefed county officials on the report later in the week.  The draft memo was prepared for the Freeland Water and Sewer District by Lindsey Consulting. Sewer district officials repeatedly refused to release the public document to The Record this week after the newspaper requested the memo under the state’s Open Records Act. The memo was later obtained from a different source.

Installing a new sewer system is a critical step in the urbanization of Freeland. Although county commissioners have approved a long-range growth plan for Freeland, the area cannot be developed under the plan until urban-style infrastructure — including the new wastewater treatment system — is in place to handle higher density development.

Island County Commissioner Phil Bakke said officials from the sewer district are expected to gather with city and county leaders at next month’s Council of Governments meeting to request their support on devoting rural sales tax revenues to the sewer project.

Bakke said many realize the new sewer system is the most pressing infrastructure project on the South End.


Former Senator DiBella, the "Silver Fox" at an MDC meeting;  Judge Burns' decision story below.


Will be on appeal, we are sure!
DiBella Must Pay $791K; MDC Chief Fined, Ordered To Give Back Sham Fee
By EDMUND H. MAHONY And JON LENDER | Courant Staff Writers
March 14, 2008

Hartford's regional sewer czar William A. DiBella was ordered to pay nearly $800,000 on Thursday for taking a sham fee on a pension deal growing out of the 1990s investment scandal that sent his friend, former state Treasurer Paul Silvester, to prison.

The order, filed Thursday in New Haven by Senior U.S. District Judge Ellen B. Burns, contained little good news for DiBella. But the former state senator vowed to keep fighting his critics, who say the pension case should force his resignation as chairman of the Metropolitan District Commission, the capital region sewer and water authority now spending $2 billion on a massive upgrade project.

Burns ordered DiBella to give up the $374,500 "finder's fee" he collected from Silvester's 1998 investment of $75 million from the state employee pension fund in a private equity partnership run by Republican fundraiser Frederick R. Malek. In her order, Burns repeated a conclusion that has surfaced frequently in long-running litigation over the deal: DiBella collected an enormous fee even though he "played no role" in the investment.

The judge also ordered DiBella to pay $307,127.45 in interest and a $110,000 civil fine, bringing the total to more than $791,000.

"DiBella's violation clearly involved fraud, deceit, manipulation or deliberate or reckless disregard of a regulatory requirement," Burns said in her order.

The amount of the civil fine was one of the bright spots for DiBella. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which a year ago won a unanimous civil verdict against DiBella after suing over the pension deal, wanted him fined more than twice as much — an amount equivalent to his sham fee.

Burns also denied the SEC's request that DiBella be permanently barred from serving as an officer or director of a publicly held company, which she said is not "warranted in this case."

The SEC suit against DiBella is the last act in a series of indictments and lawsuits that showcased the culture of venality that infused the state Capitol during the late 1990s. The cases focused on politically connected figures on the fringes of convicted former Gov. John G. Rowland's administration who used their influence to collect millions of dollars by rigging fees tied to Silvester pension fund investments.

Luke T. Cadigan, one of the SEC lawyers who sued DiBella, said Thursday: "We are pleased with the court's decision and think that the punishment properly reflects the serious nature of the securities violations that Mr. DiBella committed."

The SEC has said it wants DiBella's payments to go to the state treasury, which the commission characterized as a victim of investment fraud.

But the case may not be over yet, notwithstanding Burns' order. DiBella said Thursday he will appeal.  He also said Burns' order was not as bad as it might have been. He said the SEC originally wanted an order forcing him to pay more than $1 million.  And he was pleased that he was not prohibited from serving on the boards of public companies.

"This is a civil matter that's been going on for 10 years," DiBella said. "The appeal is part of the process."

The repayment order in itself was enough to renew calls for DiBella's ouster as Metropolitan District chairman and chief steward of its unprecedented construction program. So far, he has avoided ouster by mobilizing allies on the 29-member district board.

"This is what we have been talking about for basically a year," said Newington Mayor Jeff Wright, a Republican, district board member and DiBella critic. "Now that the matter has come to a conclusion, I call for him to step down as chairman of the MDC."

Wright urged the eight district member towns to follow the lead of the Newington Town Council, which has adopted a resolution of no confidence in DiBella. The chief executives of member towns are scheduled to meet this morning.

"I think it's time for the elected officials to say 'enough is enough,' in the name of good government," Wright said.

DiBella has ignored calls for his resignation for 10 months and said Thursday that he would continue to do so.

"Nothing has changed," he said, after reading the court order. "I have no intention of resigning."

DiBella said findings by a federal jury and judge — that he was involved in fraud, deceit, manipulation and disregard of securities regulations — have "no impact on how I function in the MDC." He said that, over his political career as Hartford city councilman, state legislator and MDC chairman, he has never been found guilty of an ethics violation.

"I've never had a felony or misdemeanor charge against me in my entire life," he said.

He said, unlike him, Silvester and others were convicted and imprisoned for their roles in the treasury scandal.

"I was investigated in depth on the criminal issues, and there was never a charge against me," he said.

Silvester, a Republican, was state treasurer from 1997 until 1999. After being voted out of office, he began cooperating with FBI agents looking into how he invested money from the state pension fund. Silvester's admissions were included in FBI reports obtained by The Courant.

Silvester said he felt indebted to DiBella, a Democrat and an old friend, because DiBella had secretly supported Silvester's unsuccessful campaign in 1998. Silvester said he first tried to arrange a finder's fee for DiBella in connection with a pension fund investment he placed with Paine Webber. When Paine Webber balked at paying DiBella, Silvester said he agreed to have DiBella written in as a finder in the investment with Malek's company, Thayer Capital Partners of Washington, D.C.

A variety of sources said DiBella urged Silvester to increase the amount of the state investment with Malek from $50 million to $75 million, a move that would have increased the amount of his fee. Eventually, Silvester said he agreed to the $75 million figure, meaning DiBella would have received a $525,000 fee.

Malek's company, which stood to earn millions of dollars in money management fees, also stood to benefit from a larger investment. According to the FBI reports, Silvester told Malek that Thayer could have the investment but that DiBella needed a commission.

After Silvester lost the 1998 election, his successor, Denise Nappier, became suspicious of his investments. Among other things, Nappier reduced the state's investment with Thayer, cutting DiBella's fee to $374,500.

In Thursday's court order, Burns wrote that DiBella knew that his fee from the Thayer investment was a fraud and admitted as much when he testified during the SEC suit.

"He admitted that he was not the finder on the Thayer … deal, that it was his understanding that Silvester put him on the deal to make up for the Paine Webber deal, and that he had a general awareness that Silvester's conduct was improper," Burns wrote. She also wrote that DiBella pushed to increase the Thayer investment "with no understanding" of whether that would benefit the state employees' pension fund but understanding that it would increase his fee.
MDC Water Rates Rising; Some Say Higher Fees Are Unfair In City
By DANIEL E. GOREN | Courant Staff Writer
February 11, 2008

Metropolitan District Commission customers may want to be on the alert for leaky faucets and running toilets, because the cost of water is going up and will continue to rise for several years.

Beginning last month, most water bills sent to customers in the eight Metropolitan District Commission towns have carried a surcharge to pay for the bonds issued in a $2 billion planned upgrade of the region's sewers and sewage treatment facilities.  That surcharge — called a sewer service fee — amounts this year to 35 cents per every 100 cubic feet of water used. That's on top of the $2.21 per 100 cubic feet that customers are now paying for water.

According to the MDC, the average residential water bill in the member communities is about $275 per year. That will increase to about $318 during the first year of the sewer service fee.

The surcharge — which appears only on bills for customers who get both sewer and water service from the MDC — will increase each year for about a decade, capping off at about $4.50 per 100 cubic feet, a rate that will still be competitive or better than most other water companies, MDC officials said.  Commissioners on the district's 29-member board opted for the surcharge after the state legislature would not allow the agency to charge all its water users — including nonmember towns, such as Glastonbury, that only buy MDC water — to pay for the sewer upgrade. The MDC's charter says it cannot charge a sewer service fee to those who don't receive both the district's water and sewer services.

Rather than face the political consequences of simply increasing the rates assessed each town based on the property values — a system that benefited Hartford over its wealthier suburban neighbors, such as West Hartford — it was decided to spread the cost equally among customers with MDC sewer and water service.  The new formula, agreed upon unanimously by the commission, was urged by suburban commissioners, where higher property assessments would have meant paying a larger share of the massive sewer project. But passing the fee directly to water users has its own consequences: the poor and less-well-to-do will pay the same as more wealthy customers.

"Per household cost, there had been a subsidy that was happening primarily for the city of Hartford," said Jeff Wright, a commissioner from Newington and the town's mayor. "Now, people are going to pay primarily for their usage, and that subsidy is going to be gone, which I think is going to create some relief for the majority of the member towns."

Wright compares water service to any other utility. "Within the same utility company, why should one payer pay more than another based on what your income level is?" Wright said. "The phone companies, the cable companies, the electrical companies — it doesn't matter what your zip code is, you'll pay the same rate."

The MDC and its member towns — Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield — are under federal and state mandate to fix the ailing sewers, which dump untreated sewage into area rivers, streets and basements during dozens of heavy rains each year. The massive project will take place over the next 15-plus years.

Wright said that basing the charge on water usage has two other advantages. It encourages customers to conserve water by turning on sprinkler systems less often, using water-efficient appliances and installing water-saving shower heads and toilets. It also provides relief to governments of the member towns, which would have seen their budgets crushed by the weight of the $2 billion project and their bond ratings dragged down, Wright said. Without the sewer service fee, projections showed that the MDC portion of Newington's municipal budget eventually would have dwarfed the town's police budget, he said.

But some say that forcing Hartford residents — who generally are poorer — to pay the same amount places an unfair burden on those who can least afford it.

Dr. Larry Deutsch, city councilman in Hartford, said the sewer charge, even if assessed equally to all, sets up a system with a "regressive impact." As the cost of water rises, those who are more wealthy make choices about how often to wash their car or water their lawn, while a poor person decides "whether to give their baby a bath or not."

"This is a shifting toward a more regressive payment structure in general," Deutsch said. "It is the same as the cost of gasoline going up or the cost of oil heating in your house going up. You could say it is fair in a literal, small sense, but it is the poor that wind up going without heat in their homes. It is the poor that have to skimp on electricity and choose between gasoline for their car and medicine."

MDC Chairman William DiBella, a commissioner from Hartford, said Deutsch is "not wrong at all" in his assessment, but said the Hartford delegation on the MDC board had to make a tough compromise to ensure that the sewer project went forward. It came down to what DiBella described as the crux of good government — "the art of the deal," he called it.

That compromise, DiBella said, meant the $2 billion project would be based on sewer service fees, while the operating and maintenance budget of the MDC would continue to be based on property value, largely to Hartford's benefit.

"The suburban towns were really upset, because under the existing formula, Hartford had an advantage," he said. "In order to get this thing done, there had to be some kind of a compromise. I think everyone felt that something was being taken away from them. No one walked away unscathed. And that is true of every political compromise. No one walks away and says, 'Hey, I made out like a bandit.'

"We knew there was no way we could sell this to the suburban towns if we said, 'OK, here is the deal. You are going to see an increase of 17 percent each year and your property tax is going to go through the roof.' They would have gone to war. We couldn't have done it."

DiBella also said that Hartford had to take the long view of the upgrade project, the vast majority of which will be done in Hartford and benefit the city in the form of newly paved streets and new sewers.  And as members of the water-rich MDC, DiBella said the fiscal future of Hartford and other member towns should be secure.

"No one has the water we have," DiBella said. "It is liquid gold. As the years go out, more and more people are going to be buying that water. It is a certain revenue stream. It is better than oil."
MDC Backs DiBella; He Is Re-Elected Chairman, Despite Pension Scandal
By JEFFREY B. COHEN | Courant Staff Writer
January 8, 2008

Those who wanted William A. DiBella re-elected chairman of the Metropolitan District Commission Monday night described him as a man of "ideas and leadership." DiBella's detractors charged that the two-term chairman had no "moral or ethical authority."

By a 17-11 vote, his supporters prevailed. And DiBella — the Democratic former state Senate majority leader whose MDC candidacy was clouded by his role in a decade-old state pension scandal — savored the victory.

"Listen, I've been in politics for 40 years, and I've always had detractors," he said after the vote. "You don't do anything in this world without people that are against you. When everybody loves you, there's something wrong."

The MDC, the region's water and sewer agency, is about to embark on a 15-year, $2 billion upgrade that aims to stop the overflow of untreated sewage into Hartford-area rivers, streets and basements during heavy rains. The MDC is under federal and state mandate to fix the problem.

In May, a federal civil jury found that DiBella aided and abetted securities law violations in a tainted 1998 state pension investment by then-state Treasurer Paul Silvester — a deal from which DiBella reaped a $374,500 fee. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alleged, and the jury agreed, that DiBella did nothing to earn the fee. Rather, the SEC characterized the fee as a political payoff from Silvester to his longtime friend and sometime political ally DiBella.

The SEC wants DiBella to pay the fee back with interest and pay a fine, which could ultimately cost him more than $1 million. Federal regulators said DiBella's conduct involved "fraud, deceit, manipulation and deliberate disregard" for regulations. SEC officials have argued that he should be permanently enjoined from serving as an officer or director of a publicly held company.

After the verdict, DiBella said he would "more than likely" resign as commission chairman. Monday, he said that the matter was still unresolved and that it had no bearing on his role at the MDC, or his decision to seek another two-year term.

The meeting was tense at times, with DiBella's supporters and opponents bickering over parliamentary procedure. When it came time for nominations, no debate was allowed, but the nominations themselves brought DiBella's record at the MDC and with the SEC to the forefront.  Commissioner Albert Reichin nominated DiBella. In a speech seconding the nomination, Commissioner Anwar Al-Ghani of Hartford said DiBella "is by far the most capable and competent individual for the task at hand."

Commissioner Alvin E. Taylor also spoke in DiBella's favor. "Bill DiBella, bar none, probably has one of the best public policy minds that I have seen," Taylor said.

Vocal DiBella critic Jeff Wright, a Republican MDC board member and the mayor of Newington, said DiBella's candidacy should not even be considered. Wright nominated Hartford Commissioner Daniel E. Lilly instead. "Simply put, what Mr. DiBella has done is wrong and unethical," Wright said. "Leadership is about doing the right and ethical thing."

"If Mr. DiBella continues to … lead as chairman and as a commissioner of the MDC, he will be leading without any moral or ethical authority," Wright said, provoking a chuckle from DiBella.

When it came time for public comment — at the end of the meeting, not, as some commissioners wanted, at the beginning — Hartford resident Ines Pegeas asked the commissioners how they would explain their votes for DiBella to a 10th-grade civics class.

Susan Kniep, a former East Hartford mayor, asked DiBella to resign.

"Mr. DiBella has no moral compass," she said. "Your vote to approve the appointment of Mr. DiBella … is an indictment against each and every member of this commission."
MDC's Shameless Obstinacy
Hartford Courant
Rick Green
January 4, 2008

What would you think if federal lawyers had this to say about your mayor's behavior:

"Conduct in this case involved intentional fraud, deceit, manipulation and deliberate disregard of a regulatory requirement ... his conduct in this matter was not an isolated incident, but involved a series of discrete actions over the course of several months."

If your mayor got a $374,500 payoff, arranged by a corrupt state treasurer for performing "no meaningful services" related to a sham investment deal that ripped off Connecticut taxpayers, would that affect your vote?
If a jury agreed with federal lawyers, would that make a difference in your view?  If not, then congratulations. You may already be an elected or appointed official.

Unbelievably, it's apparently a foregone conclusion that a majority of the 29 members of the Metropolitan District Commission — a regional, politically partisan government agency that keeps your water clean with 550 employees and a budget bigger than most municipalities' — will vote Monday to re-elect William DiBella as chairman for another term.

As chairman of the appointed, Democrat-controlled panel governing the MDC and its $111 million annual budget, DiBella, a former majority leader in the state Senate, functions like an influential, unpaid mayor presiding over a town council. In coming years, DiBella — if re-elected — will play a key role in a $1.6 billion sewer expansion that the MDC is planning with your money.

Last May, a federal jury found that DiBella violated federal securities laws. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charged that DiBella earned the $374,500 in bogus fees arising from a "fraudulent investment scheme" masterminded by former state Treasurer Paul J. Silvester, who pleaded guilty to corruption charges and went to jail.  DiBella's critics say that this alone makes him unsuitable for leadership of a government agency that handles hundreds of millions of dollars in public money. SEC lawyers are more blunt: DiBella, who earns a living as a lobbyist and consultant, "will continue to have opportunities to use his political influence to commit securities fraud."

All of this makes no difference to the MDC's Democratic majority. Only 11 MDC panel members will vote against DiBella, according to Jeffrey Wright, a commissioner and mayor of Newington who leads the opposition.

Viewed from the outside, there is no rational argument why DiBella should keep this job. His supporters on the inside — vested, respected and experienced members of the political establishment — told me that I don't know William "Billy" DiBella.

"He's doing a good job," said Pasquale J. Salemi, an 18-year MDC commissioner and chairman of the Democratic town committee in East Hartford. "As far as the other stuff is concerned, it's still a civil suit. Anybody can get sued. He's said a number of times he didn't believe he did anything that violated any rules."

DiBella's actions were "never anything substantive," said Adam Cloud, another commissioner and real estate developer in Hartford. "We need steady leadership."

Former West Hartford Town Council member and current MDC Commissioner J. Lawrence Price told me that the allegations about DiBella were "now 10 years old."

"If I knew that Bill DiBella was doing something unethical or inappropriate in his conduct on the MDC, there is no way I would support him. It's not something I take lightly," said Price, a lawyer. "I'm really happy with what is going on over there."

These people, who know far more about Connecticut politics than I, say not to believe the evidence, the federal investigators — who are seeking more penalties against DiBella — and the jury verdict.

If you don't understand, you don't know Connecticut. And you certainly don't know Billy DiBella.
MDC Needs A New Chairman
Hartford Courant editorial
December 27, 2007

William A. DiBella has done good work in the past for the Metropolitan District Commission. He wants to stay on as MDC chairman. For the sake of the agency, he should not.

Mr. DiBella had once said that he would probably quit if a federal judge didn't overturn a jury verdict that he violated federal securities laws. The judge rejected Mr. DiBella's request to overturn the verdict, and it still stands.

All that remains to be decided is Mr. DiBella's penalty. But he says his personal legal troubles in civil court have no bearing on his performance as MDC chairman. He wants to be re-elected by the board on Jan. 7. He should not be.

Unfortunately for Mr. DiBella, the verdict casts a very dark shadow of impropriety on him and his agency as it goes forward with a massive $2 billion sewer upgrade throughout Greater Hartford.

Mr. DiBella believes he did nothing wrong in 1998 when he accepted a $374,000 fee for what the Securities and Exchange Commission described as no significant work in a fraudulent state pension investment scheme. The SEC said former state Treasurer Paul J. Silvester had arranged an even larger fee to "repay political favors" and "curry favor." Mr. Silvester eventually wound up in prison because of the scheme.

Mr. DiBella's supporters downplay the verdict and praise the work he did as a Hartford city councilman and state Senate majority leader. He notes with pride that under his leadership, voters in the MDC member towns approved the first $800 million installment to the sewer project by a 4-to-1 margin. And, he points out, the MDC has maintained its AA-plus credit rating. His powers of persuasion are not in question; his integrity is.

The SEC has asked that Mr. DiBella's penalty include a fine on top of paying back the illegal fee with interest. It has also asked that he be permanently barred from serving as an officer or director of a publicly traded company. The MDC is not publicly traded; it is a quasi-public agency. All the more reason Mr. DiBella should not be in charge. If the SEC thinks he can't be trusted with a private company, the public would have to keep a close and constant eye on this custodian of public services if he's re-elected chairman.
DiBella Won't Quit MDC
By DANIEL E. GOREN | Courant Staff Writer
December 21, 2007

Despite previously saying he would "more than likely" resign as chairman of the Metropolitan District Commission because of his ongoing legal troubles, William A. DiBella now says he will continue to serve if nominated next month for another term.

In fact, DiBella, the former state Senate majority leader, is actively seeking re-election. He has told some of his colleagues that he has already locked up the votes he needs, even as some commissioners say his role in a decade-old state pension scandal could damage the credibility of the regional water and sewer agency during its coming 15-year, $2 billion upgrade.

The 29-member commission will choose its next chairman on Jan. 7 at its first regular meeting of the new year. DiBella — who has been chairman for the past four years and on the commission for nearly three decades — is widely expected to retain the position, sources said. It is not clear whether there are any other candidates.

"If the board feels they should nominate me and elect me, I will continue my leadership," DiBella said this week. "If the majority of that board doesn't want me to be chairman, then they will decide that."

DiBella's critics on the commission would like to hold him to his original, admittedly lukewarm commitment to step aside.

"His staying casts a shadow of doubt over the operations of the MDC as we go forward," said Jeff Wright, a Republican MDC board member and the mayor of Newington. Wright was among a group that pushed for DiBella to step down in May after a civil jury found him liable in a fraudulent investment scheme. "We think the mission of the MDC is too important to get tainted by his reputation."

Wright said he and many of his fellow Republicans on the commission want to sit down with the Democrats and find a mutually acceptable candidate.

In May, a federal jury found that DiBella aided and abetted securities law violations in a tainted 1998 state pension investment by then-state Treasurer Paul Silvester — a deal from which DiBella reaped a $374,500 fee. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alleged, and the jury agreed, that DiBella did nothing to earn the fee. Rather, the SEC characterized the fee as a political payoff from Silvester to his longtime friend and sometime political ally DiBella.

The SEC wants DiBella to pay the fee back with interest and pay a fine, which could ultimately cost him more than $1 million. Federal regulators said DiBella's conduct involved "fraud, deceit, manipulation and deliberate disregard" for regulations. SEC officials have also argued that he should be permanently enjoined from serving as an officer or director of a publicly held company.

After the verdict, DiBella said he would "more than likely" resign as chairman of the commission if a judge rejected his plea to overturn the jury's verdict.

"The last thing I want to do is hurt the MDC," DiBella said at the time.

But when Senior U.S. District Judge Ellen Bree Burns rejected his plea in October, he said he had "no intention" of stepping down. DiBella said he is still deciding whether to appeal the judge's decision.

DiBella said this week that the case against him is a 10-year-old "civil issue and has absolutely nothing to do with the MDC." DiBella touts his record as a leader, saying it was under his stewardship that voters in the MDC member towns, by a wide margin, approved the referendum for the first $800 million installment of the $2 billion sewer project.

"It was the biggest referendum that the board has ever faced on an issue that many said we would never win," DiBella said. "And we won it by 4-to-1."

DiBella has ardent supporters on the MDC board. They say he is a good leader, still has far-reaching connections at almost all levels of state government and was instrumental in leading the district through some of its most difficult challenges, including the referendum vote. And during DiBella's tenure, the MDC hired what many board members believe is the district's most able administrative staff in decades.

An example of DiBella's importance that fellow commissioners cite is his ability to negotiate with the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority. The MDC manages and operates the authority's mid-Connecticut trash-to-energy plant in Hartford — more than 100 employees work at the plant — and negotiations are ongoing to continue the district's contract beyond its 2012 expiration.

"The truth is that Bill puts a lot of time into his work with the MDC," said Bud Salemi, a Democratic commissioner from East Hartford. "I wouldn't be supportive of just anybody if I didn't think they were heading in the right direction with the MDC."

Raymond Sweezy, a Republican commissioner from Rocky Hill who backs DiBella, said the civil matter facing DiBella is a personal matter and not unlike a high-priced "ticket for speeding." It hasn't affected the chairman's ability to direct the MDC, Sweezy said.

"I'll support him," Sweezy said. "I think he has done a great job with the district since he has become chairman."

"It is not a Republican or Democrat question to me," Sweezy added. "It is about the district."

The MDC provides water and sewer service to its member towns — Bloomfield, East Hartford, Hartford, Newington, Rocky Hill, West Hartford, Wethersfield and Windsor.  It also supplies treated water to Glastonbury, East Granby, the Unionville section of Farmington, Portland, and parts of South Windsor and Farmington.
Mr. DiBella's Change Of Mind
Hartford Courant editorial
October 11, 2007

William A. DiBella said last May that he would "more than likely" quit as chairman of the Metropolitan District Commission if Senior U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Bree Burns refused to overturn a civil ruling that he collected a large investment finder's fee in violation of federal securities laws.

The judge rejected his request last week. Mr. DiBella has now taken a page out of Idaho Sen. Larry Craig's playbook and made an about-face, declaring that he has no intention of resigning and, in fact, is considering an appeal.

For the sake of the agency, he should yield to his original inclination and step down.

In May, a federal jury found Mr. DiBella liable on all counts in a lawsuit, filed against him by the Securities and Exchange Commission, seeking to recover the money he received in 1998 as part of a rigged state pension investment scheme.

The jury found that former state Treasurer Paul Silvester, who went to prison for his involvement in the conspiracy, invested $75 million in state employee pension funds with a Washington, D.C.-based company and arranged for the firm to pay Mr. DiBella a $374,000 fee for which, the SEC said, he did no significant work.

Mr. DiBella's continued refusal to give up his position on the commission could tarnish any public project the MDC engages in, especially the massive $1.6 billion sewer upgrade that is just getting underway. Several board members have pushed for him to step down.

Supporters fondly cite the good work that Mr. DiBella has done for the state and the city of Hartford as a former city councilman, state Senate majority leader and MDC chairman.

His legacy, however, will be diminished by his stubbornly clinging to his chairmanship. He should do the right thing and resign.
In the Greater Hartford area...
MDC Sewer Talks Collapse In Finger-Pointing
By JEFFREY B. COHEN And DANIEL E. GOREN | Courant Staff Writers
August 6, 2007

The presence of a Hartford businessman during crucial negotiations over a massive $1.6 billion regional sewer project was a major point of contention - and might have been a key factor in the talks' collapse.

The talks - between officials from the Metropolitan District Commission, the region's sewer authority, and Hartford legislators - revolved around how much of the work would go to minority contractors.

The MDC was looking to the legislature to approve a new formula to help finance the sewer upgrade, but Hartford lawmakers Sen. Eric Coleman and state Rep. Art Feltman wanted to make sure that the project included work for minority contractors.

The two sides were unable to reach agreement and the effort fell apart in the final hours of the legislative session - meaning, at least for this year, that the cost of the sewer upgrade would fall to local property taxpayers in Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield.

The MDC says the talks fell apart because Hartford legislators insisted businessman Rufus Wells be in the room during negotiations - an allegation the lawmakers dispute.

Wells - who told the commission that he recently made well over half a million dollars doing minority contract compliance work with the Hartford Housing Authority and the city's school building project - wants to do work on the sewer project. His presence during the talks posed a conflict of interest, the commission said.

"I wasn't having it," said MDC Commissioner Adam Cloud. "I said to Sen. Coleman, `It's irresponsible for us to have this kind of discussion with Rufus in the room.' ... I told Eric Coleman that I'm not going to be party to a meeting in which [Wells] is going to be present."

But Coleman and Feltman, a Hartford mayoral candidate, say that the blowup over Wells' presence was an excuse that the commission used to railroad the process and paper over the reality that minority contractors often don't get the work they are promised.

Feltman said that the Wells issue was a "red herring," Wells said the commission was putting up a "smoke screen" and Coleman said that the commission was just using Wells as a "convenient excuse."

"The MDC was frustrated because they couldn't as easily snow Rep. Feltman and myself because of Rufus being there," Coleman said. "I think at some point, the MDC interpreted Rufus' involvement as an impediment to what they were trying to accomplish, which was to remove completely any language about minority involvement from the bill."

"Their position was, `Trust us, and we'll get it done,'" Coleman said. "Unfortunately, it has reached a point where trust them is not an option for me, because we end up getting screwed."

Feltman and Coleman insisted on having Wells in the room because he provided valuable experience and expertise that they needed to understand the process, they said.

"What the MDC was doing was trying to deprive us of knowledge so they could be the only ones who could assert their expertise," Feltman said.

The MDC is preparing to undertake a massive project designed to fix problems with the region's antiquated and overextended sewers that send sewage into rivers and basements when it rains hard.

A bill before the legislature last session would have authorized a surcharge to help finance the 15-year upgrade project by spreading the cost among the district's water users. Without it, the price tag would land hard on the municipal budgets of the MDC's eight member towns.

But in April, Feltman and Coleman amended the legislation to include standards for minority contracting. Those standards would have required that 18.75 percent of the small business contracts needed for the project be set aside for minority-owned firms.

It also required that 25 percent of those employed in the entire project be members of minorities, and that 5 percent be ex-offenders who have completed their probation or parole. Finally, the legislators wanted to assess some kind of financial penalty upon the commission should it not comply with the contracting standards.

But MDC officials, although saying that they favored helping minorities, thought that the targets were not supported by tested data, that the penalties for noncompliance jeopardized the project and that the requirements were possibly illegal.

In fact, the commission's negotiator - attorney and lobbyist Brendan Fox - advised it in early April that the bill "must be amended to take out the [minority] set-aside requirements and the penalties."

"The proponents of these set-aside requirements suggest that the MDC has failed to adequately address the issue of minority participation in the Clean Water Project," Fox said, according to meeting minutes. "This is not the case. We have a common interest; however, we may differ on the means to get there."

In an April 24 meeting, Fox expressed concerns to Feltman and Coleman, hoping that the legislators would revise the bill.

But when a May 1 meeting came, the bill's language had not changed, MDC officials said. And when Fox and Cloud arrived to talk with Feltman and Coleman, the lawmakers weren't alone. They brought Wells.

MDC officials said they would meet with Wells only if he waived his right to make money off the project. Wells refused, with the legislators' backing, saying that the waiver he was presented with would essentially bar him from MDC or related work for two decades.

Bart Halloran, the MDC's top lawyer, summed up his concern with Wells' involvement in a May 25 letter to Fox, saying that Wells shouldn't be involved in drafting requirements for a project he hoped to bid on.

"I am deeply concerned that this participation could be viewed as favoritism, or the appearance of favoritism," Halloran wrote.

Halloran then barred Fox from meeting with the legislators if Wells was present, all but ending the talks from the MDC's perspective.

But Wells says he is a scapegoat.

"They're trying to lay it at my doorstep," he said. "But they didn't want me in the negotiations because they know that Art and Eric didn't understand how to get minority work and how to implement minority programs."

Asked why Wells couldn't have been an adviser and not be in the room during negotiations, Coleman said that's a meaningless distinction of "form over substance." Feltman said it was impractical "for us to run to the phone, call Rufus, get some feedback and then run back to the room."

Besides, as legislators, they should be free to meet with whomever they choose, Feltman said.

"The MDC doesn't get to have a perspective on who we consult," Feltman said. "If we decide to go into a séance and consult with somebody who's dead, they have nothing to say about it."

"This is an excuse for them not to come to the table and to try to sabotage [our] efforts," Feltman said. "If it weren't this excuse, there'd be another."

The MDC says it is moving forward with the sewer project, and plans to conduct a study of its own to determine how many qualified minority contractors and workers are available in the region, and what can be done to increase that number, Halloran said.
MDC's DiBella Survives No-Confidence Vote
By JON LENDER, Courant Staff Writer 
May 24, 2007

Republicans on the Metropolitan District Commission's governing board failed Wednesday night to win passage of a no-confidence vote against Chairman William A. DiBella, a Democrat whom a jury last week found liable in what federal securities regulators called a fraudulent investment scheme.

But during an interview after the meeting, DiBella said that if a federal judge denies his motion to overturn the jury verdict, "it's more than likely" he would quit as chairman of the regional water and sewer agency.

 The GOP move against DiBella failed after several MDC board members - most, but not all of them Democrats - said it was "premature" to take the vote because the judge in DiBella's civil case won't rule for at least a month on his motion to overturn the jury verdict.

During Wednesday's debate DiBella refused to commit to resigning if Senior U.S. District Judge Ellen Bree Burns rules against him this summer. "I will reserve my judgment," he said.

Thirty minutes after the meeting, however, DiBella for the first time said he would consider quitting if Burns lets the jury verdict stand.

"I think that I should at least have the process followed" through to Burns' ruling, DiBella said in a phone interview. But, he added, "if in fact the ruling goes against me, that's an issue that I have to take into consideration" and "quite frankly at that time, it's more than likely I would resign as chairman."

If Burns rules against him, DiBella said, he probably would appeal to a higher court. But such an appeal, which probably would take a long time, wouldn't necessarily figure into his decision on whether to resign from the powerful but unpaid MDC post. "The last thing I want to do is hurt the MDC," DiBella said.

"Again, it's a process that has to play out," he said. "If she rules in my favor, it's another issue."

Earlier, the board debated more than an hour before defeating the resolution "that this board has no confidence in the leadership of Mr. DiBella as chairman of this board." The vote was 16-11 against the resolution. DiBella and 12 fellow Democrats were joined by three Republicans in voting it down. All 11 votes favoring the resolution came from Republicans.

Soon afterward, the board voted 17-10 against a separate motion asking DiBella to resign outright from the 29-member board. Two members were absent.

Last Friday, the jury in New Haven found DiBella aided and abetted violations of securities laws in a 1998 deal arranged by convicted former state treasurer Paul Silvester. Government lawyers argued that DiBella did no meaningful work for a $374,500 fee from a firm with which Silvester placed a $75 million state pension investment.

But DiBella and allies argued that Friday's civil court verdict was not the final word in the Securities and Exchange Commission's lawsuit. "Until a final adjudication in this matter is made," Democratic member Adam Cloud said, the vote on DiBella is "premature."

Even a Republican - Allen Hoffman, one of the 11 who voted for the "no confidence" resolution - said "we're very premature" in taking the vote, even though the facts present an issue of right and wrong. Hoffman's dilemma showed in his subsequent vote against the resolution calling for DiBella to resign.

Republicans who led the push for the resolutions - which MDC lawyers said would not have been binding, anyway - said Friday's verdict was enough for them. A jury of eight unanimously found DiBella aided in improprieties, said Republican member Jeff Wright.

Wright and other Republicans said it is unfair to taxpayers to leave DiBella in charge of the MDC at a time when it is asking to spend $2 billion in public money for a massive sewer reconstruction project. They said it is time for the board to send a public message in support of ethics.

The MDC "is commencing the largest public construction project in its history and will be issuing hundreds of millions of dollars of notes and bonds, which are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission," Wright said.

In its verdict, the jury found DiBella liable on all counts in the regulators' suit. The SEC said DiBella's $374,500 fee was sham, arranged by Silvester in connection with a politically motivated investment of state pension funds with Thayer Capital Partners of Washington. Silvester got Thayer to pay the fee to DiBella as a reward for past and anticipated favors, both in politics and business, the SEC said.

DiBella Wednesday said the easy and less expensive thing for him would have been to settle the suit without admitting wrongdoing, but he didn't because he believes he acted properly. His defenders on the MDC board praised his long MDC service and said he has shown leadership and skill in addressing the long-standing sewer-pollution problem that the major construction project is designed to correct.

One Hartford citizen, Republican Town Committee member Kevin Brookman, contended DiBella shouldn't have been named to the MDC board in the first place. DiBella represents Hartford on the board but doesn't really live there, Brookman contends.

DiBella maintains an apartment on Gold Street and is registered to vote in Hartford. But court papers and other documents list DiBella's address as Old Saybrook, where he and his wife have a lavish house.

After the meeting, DiBella insisted he meets the Hartford residency requirement. He pulled out his driver's license, which lists the Gold Street address in Hartford.

Asked where he spends more time, in Hartford or Old Saybrook, he said: "That's my business."

Move To Oust DiBella At MDC;  After Jury's Verdict In Fraud Lawsuit Republicans Say He Should Leave Board
By JON LENDER, Courant Staff Writer
May 22, 2007

Republicans on the Metropolitan District Commission's governing board moved Monday to try to oust Democrat William A. DiBella as chairman after a jury last week found him liable in what government lawyers called a fraudulent investment scheme.  The GOP members forced a special meeting of the MDC board Wednesday for a no-confidence vote on DiBella's leadership of the regional water and sewer agency.
 
But DiBella refused Monday to quit, and legal questions made it unclear whether the board has the power to force him out. Still, the Republicans were intent on mobilizing public opinion to pressure him to relinquish his leadership.  Jeff Wright, a Republican on the MDC's 29-member board, called DiBella Monday and asked him to resign based on the jury's verdict Friday in a suit brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The jury found that DiBella, a former state Senate majority leader, aided and abetted securities laws violations in a tainted 1998 state pension investment by then-state Treasurer Paul Silvester - a deal from which DiBella reaped a $374,500 fee.

"I personally asked him to resign from the board," Wright said. "My thoughts were that, going forward, his being on the board can only damage the reputation of him and of the board."

In refusing to resign, DiBella said the civil court case would not conclude until the judge rules on a motion by his lawyer to overturn the verdict.

"I have no intentions of resigning relative to this issue," DiBella said. "First of all, it hasn't been resolved; it's still pending." A ruling on his appeal is likely this summer, he said.

Wright and other Republican board members were unwilling to wait that long, and on Monday they forced the scheduling of a special meeting Wednesday at 5 p.m. at MDC headquarters in Hartford. Their agenda: to vote on resolutions "expressing no confidence" in DiBella's leadership and asking that he resign.  Wright said 11 of the board's 15 GOP members favor ousting DiBella from both the chairman's post and the board. However, doubts arose about whether any vote would be binding on DiBella, even if Wright and his allies could line up a majority.

Interim MDC counsel R. Bartley Halloran said his initial research of the agency's charter and ordinances indicates that once a chairman has been elected by the board to a specific term - as DiBella was - he cannot be removed. Halloran said he is willing to listen to counter-arguments from Republicans and plans to reach a final position in time for Wednesday's meeting.

It also was unclear whether DiBella could be removed from the board.  If he could, Halloran said, it would be up to the appointing authority - in DiBella's case Hartford's city council - not the MDC board.  Hartford Mayor Eddie A. Perez plans to bring up the subject with council leaders in a day or two, said Matt Hennessy, the mayor's chief of staff.

Friday's jury verdict "raised some issues that are troubling, and [Perez] is going to bring those issues up with the city council leadership, who are the ones who actually appointed Mr. DiBella," Hennessy said.

Friday's verdict - by a civil jury in federal court in New Haven - found DiBella liable on all counts in a federal securities suit. The suit said DiBella took a sham $374,500 fee that Silvester arranged in 1998 through a politically motivated investment of state pension funds.  SEC lawyers contended that DiBella did no meaningful work for the fee he received from Thayer Capital Partners of Washington, D.C.

Silvester placed an investment of $75 million in state pension funds with Thayer, and arranged that Thayer pay the fee to DiBella as a reward for past and anticipated favors, both in politics and business, the SEC said.

DiBella denied wrongdoing. His lawyer next month will submit a brief on a motion asking the judge to overrule the jury. SEC lawyers will oppose it. A decision is expected in July or August.
Duel Brews Over MDC Plan:   Water Rates Would More Than Double In Next Decade To Fund Sewer Upgrade
By DANIEL E. GOREN, Courant Staff Writer
April 7, 2007

Opponents are unlatching their holsters for a political shootout over legislation that could empower the Metropolitan District Commission to, over the next decade, more than double the cost of the water it sells.

In a fight that will take place in the General Assembly's back alleys, some legislators already have discharged a few early political rounds to protect their constituents.

The proposal would authorize the MDC to pay for a $1.6 billion sewer upgrade project by adding a surcharge to the bills of its water users. During about 50 heavy rains a year, untreated sewage overflows into the Hartford region's rivers, the city's streets and people's basements from pipes that are too old and too small to handle the extra volume.

But communities that use MDC water - not its sewers - say an extra charge on their water bills to fix something they don't use is grossly unjust.

The MDC has eight member towns that get both sewer and water services - Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield. But it also sells only water service to nonmember towns - Farmington, South Windsor, Glastonbury, East Granby and Portland.

State Rep. Tom Kehoe, D-Glastonbury, said he plans to fight the legislation and anticipates those who represent other towns that buy water from the MDC will join him.

"This bill strikes me as very unfair," Kehoe said.

Over the next 10 years, the increases would boost the typical residential customer's annual bill from $196 to $471, officials said, not including inflation.

Of the MDC's approximately 101,000 water accounts, Glastonbury has the highest number among nonmember towns, with 5,953; South Windsor is next, with 2,783; then East Granby, 490. Portland and Farmington are considered single accounts by the MDC because the towns buy water under a bulk contract and redistribute it to property owners.

William DiBella, the chairman of the MDC's 29-member board, said he understands nonmember towns' objections to the surcharge. But pollution caused by waste entering the Connecticut River is everyone's problem, he said.

And, DiBella said, towns that buy the MDC's water benefit from a massive investment by the district's member towns over the past 75 years to cultivate its source of clean, very inexpensive water. Now they want a return on that investment.

"We invested an enormous amount of money to create our water system, and now we are asking to take some of that equity out and put it toward our sewer system," he said. "Why should the MDC's members be denied the ability to mark that water up?"

"I don't think we are being unfair on how we are parceling this out," he said. "We are not gouging anyone. Everyone is paying the same price, including the district's member towns."

MDC water customers, including those in member towns, pay $1.96 per 100 cubic feet of water, officials said. The new water charges would cause that figure to more than double within the next 10 years. The fee would be added in increments of 30 cents per 100 cubic feet, per year, for the first five years. Then increments of 25 cents per 100 cubic feet every year for the next five years.

In the next 10 years, that means a $2.75 increase.

The overflow from sewers pollutes the Connecticut River, tributaries and Wethersfield Cove. The state Department of Environmental Protection and the federal Environmental Protection Agency have ordered the MDC to fix the problem.

Voters approved a referendum proposal for $800 million, the first installment of the $1.6 billion project. Additional referendums are anticipated to raise the rest.

But to help pay for the massive cost, the MDC wants to change its charter to allow what it calls a "clean water surcharge."

The General Assembly's planning and economic development committee approved the legislation last week and sent it for further review by the finance committee. State Rep. Art Feltman, co-chairman of the planning and economic development committee, said the entire region is responsible for solving this environmental and public health crisis.

"An ecosystem knows no jurisdiction," he said.

But state Rep. Bill Aman, R-South Windsor, voted in the minority against the proposed legislation before it wassent along. He said he is still trying to work out a solution with those who favor the bill, to tweak the language and limit the surcharge to those customers who get both sewer and water.

Both Aman and Kehoe said their towns are already paying millions to clean the environment by upgrading their own sewer treatment plants - about $14 million in South Windsor and $28 million in Glastonbury. Neither lawmaker sees why his constituents should be hit twice for the same purpose.

"I think it is very unfair to these particular residents," Aman said. "By this logic, why doesn't Greenwich come to South Windsor and ask us to pay for their sewer upgrades too? After all, waste ends up in Long Island Sound."

Portland, which buys water from the MDC, has already solved its dilemma.

In 1998, Portland signed a 30-year contract with the MDC, locking in rates throughout the life of the contract to buy water in bulk for nearly 5,000 homes. The town has its own sewers and treatment plant.

When word came out about a possible surcharge on people's MDC water bills, state Sen. Eileen M. Daily, who represents Portland, called DiBella and asked that he review the contract. DiBella said he assured her that Portland was protected.

"We don't believe we would have the right, or that the legislature would, to override that contract," he said.
MDC Lifts Chiefs' Salary Ceiling
By DANIEL E. GOREN, Courant Staff Writer
December 24, 2006

As the Metropolitan District Commission prepares to embark on a massive, $1.6 billion overhaul of the region's sewer system, one of the first steps the agency is taking is more about cash flow than overflow: increasing the salary limit for its highest-paid officials by 41 percent.

The executives - chief operating officer Scott Jellison, chief administrative officer Robert Moore and chief program management officer Robert Weimer - had been earning a base salary of $159,000 a year, the maximum allowed for the executives under the agency's rules.
 
But the MDC's board of commissioners recently approved creating a minimum of $189,000, 19 percent more than the executives earn now, and a maximum of $225,000, an increase of 41 percent.  All three men report to Chuck Sheehan, the agency's chief executive officer, who was given a pay raise of 8 percent, bringing his salary from $185,400 to $200,000.

Sheehan said he is working to determine what salary each of his subordinates should make within the new range and plans to make a final recommendation to the board in January.  The increases are critical, officials said, to make sure the MDC has top-notch people on board as the 15-year project to fix the area's sewers goes forward.

But critics say it's the wrong time to be raising salaries.

"I think approving these raises sends a terrible message," said Jeff Wright, an MDC commissioner from Newington who voted against the pay raises. "Here we are, having just voted all this big money and people are going to see big increases in the cost of their bill, and here we are giving gigantic pay raises to these executives?" he said. "Go figure."

Voters in November approved the first $800 million installment of a $1.6 billion project designed to address longstanding issues. About 50 times a year, rain causes untreated sewage to overflow into the region's rivers and Hartford's streets from pipes unable to handle the volume. The overflow pollutes the Connecticut River, its tributaries and Wethersfield Cove.

MDC proponents of the salary increases say they don't want to lose the officers the district has, and they are still searching for a new chief financial officer to oversee the MDC's books. The position also paid a top salary of $159,000, but MDC officials said that was too low to lure qualified candidates away from the private sector.

"We have to do this project right, and that means getting and retaining the right people to do it," said Al Taylor, a commissioner on the MDC board who spearheaded the push for the raises. "We just refuse to have a `Big Dig' as far as this project is concerned, which means getting the best people in to do the job right.

"If that means taking flak on it," he said, "then that is what we have to do."

The MDC's board approved the increases last week by a 13-2 vote, with three abstentions. Sheehan's raise was approved unanimously.  Joe Kronen, a commissioner from East Hartford who voted against the raises, said he could not in good conscience explain the raises to voters.

"How do you go back to the voter and tell them this?" he said. "I can at least hold my head high in East Hartford and say I voted against it. ... People at the MDC do very well, money-wise and in terms of retirement benefits."

Wright said he did not have enough information to approve the new salaries, such as the full cost of health care, pension and other benefits. He said he disagreed with paying salaries that approached the private sector, while also offering the security of the public sector.  But Taylor, Sheehan and William DiBella, the board's chairman, all said the pay increases were necessary.

The MDC's $113 million annual budget will soon double, Sheehan said, as the $1.6 billion sewer project starts. To keep the MDC operating correctly, the agency must hire a qualified chief financial officer and keep continuity in the staff it already has, the proponents said.

"While some might criticize the timing of the salary increases, the other side of the argument is that the public has entrusted - through an endorsement with a huge plurality at the polls - the MDC with a huge investment," Sheehan said. "They endorsed the project because it was developed by a very qualified team."

The MDC has performed two searches for a qualified CFO, but each failed, Sheehan said. The first got no responses, he said. The second got responses from five qualified candidates, but as the MDC started doing interviews, four of those applicants left the process to take private-sector jobs that paid more, Sheehan said.

The fifth offered to take the job for the $159,000 salary, but only on a part-time basis, he said.

"Moving the MDC and this project forward, and the careful and effective management of this project, requires a qualified, credentialed team," Sheehan said. "And it requires continuity, and I believe the salaries that have been recommended will allow me to assemble and keep that kind of team."
Sewer Vote Defies Convention
Hartford Courant editorial
November 13, 2006
 
Voters in the eight municipalities serviced by the Metropolitan District Commission deserve a lot of credit for approving the first half of a estimated $1.6 billion upgrade to the regional sewer system.  Conventional wisdom would argue against supporting a project whose cost to individual customers has yet to be determined, and whose presence will not be visibly apparent after 17 years of bothersome construction.

Yet, by a 2-to-1 margin, voters recognized that there is no alternative. The work is necessary to eliminate the overflow of billions of gallons of excess sewage that dump regularly into the Connecticut River, neighboring waterways and hundreds of homes in Hartford, West Hartford, Newington and Rocky Hill each year during heavy rainfall.

The backups and overflows occur because much of Greater Hartford's mid-19th-century sewer system carries sanitary sewage and stormwater in the same pipes. Development has introduced so much more sewage and stormwater into the system that it can no longer absorb the volume.  Most of the money will go to build separate conduits for sanitary sewage and rainwater.

MDC officials also intend to expand and improve the agency's sewage treatment plant in Hartford's South Meadows.

Although estimates vary as to how much of the cost might be added to the property-tax bills of homeowners over the life of the project, rest assured that it will be several times what they are paying now.  But residents of the MDC towns understood it was a case of doing it now under local control or having it done by the federal government, possibly at higher cost, later. 
Wide Approval Expected For MDC Sewer Upgrade;   Two-Thirds Of Voters Agreeing To Project
By DANIEL E. GOREN, Courant Staff Writer
November 8, 2006
 
Voters in the Metropolitan District Commission towns appeared to have approved the first installment of a $1.6 billion sewer upgrade project Tuesday to eliminate what regulators describe as an environmental and public health crisis.

The referendum question asked voters in Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield to underwrite the project's initial phase to the tune of $800 million.

There was no final tally early today, but with three towns reported and local officials citing unofficial results in two other towns, the measure was winning approval by a ratio of more than 2-to-1.

"It seemed that the message hit home that this project is dealing with a very serious public health issue and a very serious environmental problem, one that has really plagued the region for the past 30 years and remained unaddressed," said Chuck Sheehan, the MDC's chief executive officer.

About 50 times a year, rain causes untreated sewage to overflow into the region's rivers and the city's streets from pipes unable to handle the volume, MDC officials said.

The overflow pollutes the Connecticut River, its tributaries and Wethersfield Cove. At times, more than 300 basements in MDC member towns have flooded with raw sewage, officials said.

Both the state Department of Environmental Protection and the federal Environmental Protection Agency have ordered the MDC to fix the problem. Had the referendum question not passed, MDC officials predicted the federal government would take over control of the 15-year project.

Joe Kronen, an MDC commissioner from East Hartford, said the MDC "clearly did a good job in promoting" the need for repairs.

"The voters spoke," Kronen said. "But there is still a lot more to do, a lot more to address."

One factor still being debated is exactly how the cost will be spread among homeowners and businesses.

The MDC is still discussing the fairest way to charge its members - linking the charge to local property taxes, adding an across-the-board charge directly to MDC water customers or basing the charge on sewer use. Regardless of the method used, the project is going to lead to much higher annual costs for consumers and will vary depending on location.

Under the property tax method, for example, an average household in Hartford would pay $319 a year by 2016, compared with $99 today. A West Hartford family would pay $771, up from $238 today, MDC estimates show.

But the burden would shift if MDC water customers ended up subsidizing the project. In that case, a Hartford family in 2016 would pay $468, and a West Hartford household would pay $697. Under that method, which would require approval from the state legislature, the MDC would tack on extra charges to water-user bills in its eight member towns, as well as the five other towns that get MDC water: Farmington, South Windsor, Glastonbury, East Granby and Portland.

The sewer-use method, which has few supporters, would end up hitting residential customers the hardest, with an average annual payout of $860 by 2016.

All numbers in the estimates, including the total cost, are in 2006 dollars and will rise with inflation.
 
MDC requests $800 million to save failing system
By: Ben Rubin, Journal Inquirer
10/25/2006

At the Metropolitan District Commission's office in Hartford, a colorful map illustrates raw sewage overflows in all eight MDC communities.  Blue boxes, showing where flooding and basement backups occur, cover most of Hartford and form a thick line across Newington, large portions of West Hartford, and Wethersfield. Green dots, displaying single-pipe sewage overflows, speckle nearly every corner of Hartford.
 
The problem is so pervasive that one billion gallons of untreated sewage are dumped into the Connecticut River and local waterways every year.

To begin fixing the long-standing, major health and environmental risk, residents in Bloomfield, East Hartford, Hartford, Newington, Rocky Hill, West Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor will vote on a referendum question Nov. 7 to fund the first phase of MDC's $1.6 billion improvement plan, called the Clean Water Project.

But suffice to say that a vote against the $800 million referendum question won't be a vote against the project because the state and federal government ordered the repairs be made no matter what - with or without the MDC's control.

A majority of total votes from all the communities pooled together is required to pass the referendum question.
"I see it as something that has to be done and I'd rather have some say in the cost," said Kathy Lombardo, an East Hartford resident and Clean Water Project citizen representative. "When I first heard $1.6 billion, my mouth dropped."

Officials at the MDC don't hide the fact that there is something wrong with their sewers.

The 150-year-old, overtaxed piping system in Hartford persistently overflows all around the city, as sewage and garbage flushed down toilets bubble up into streets, basements, and yards and flow into the Connecticut River, Wethersfield Cove, and Park River during heavy rains.

Hartford's overflows are caused mostly because the city has only one pipe system for sewage and storm water instead of two separate ones, and the narrow pipes were built for a population of 13,000, not 300,000, MDC officials say.  The newer pipes in the MDC member towns have their own problems, with cracks and breaks in pipes bringing in excessive rainwater, which overburden the sewers and also cause overflows.

"We put out more E. coli on a rainy day then all the spinach in the United States. Why? Because we can't treat it," said Robert Weimar, MDC's chief of program management for the Clean Water Project.

Because of these problems, the MDC was fined $850,000 in March and has two consent decrees over its head from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the state Department of Environmental Protection, ordering it to undergo significant construction to stop the spillage.

In response, the MDC has put together the Clean Water Project, a $1.6 billion venture that will take 15 years to complete, to fix the problem.

If the Nov. 7 referendum question is rejected, there are consequences. The state and federal governments could take over the project, the project could be temporarily funded through MDC's operating budget, or a new referendum could be called, MDC officials say.  But while locals may suffer from sticker shock looking at the $800 million figure, the cost to residents may be mitigated through state and federal grants, as well as gradually spreading the project cost over nearly two decades.

Even so, sewage fees to MDC are expected to rise over the next seven years by three to four times, from $14 a month to $30-$53.  This means the average annual fee of $170 for sewage will jump to $550 by 2016, MDC officials say.

"Obviously, the fiscal impact is an area of concern, but I think folks should recognize that this is a project that will take 15 years to complete and many of the improvements will last well beyond a 50-year cycle," said Windsor Town Manager Peter P. Souza.  As of now, the payment structure for the project has not yet been decided, with three alternatives on the table:

* The MDC could fund the project using its current plan, which bills users based on their property taxes.

* A surcharge based on water consumption could be added to the sewage bill to pay for the project, while regular MDC operations would still be paid through the current structure.

* All sewage fees, both for the project and regular operating costs, could be based on usage and not property taxes.

Each one of these possibilities holds its own strength and weakness in finding a true egalitarian way for all eight communities to fund the project.

"It's important for the project to get done, and the hard part is finding an equitable way to finance it," Souza said.  The scope of the project will include separating Hartford's sewer system to two, with MDC needing to do extensive work digging up roadways and re-piping hundreds of homes around the city. This portion of the project is estimated to cost about $865 million, Weimar said.

To bolster the ancient system, Hartford's treatment plant will be largely expanded, and larger pipes and more pipes will be built. Eventually, a huge 30-foot diameter, 2- to 5-mile storage tunnel will be built under the center of the city to increase the system's capacity during storms.  Efforts to stop rainwater leaks into sewers around West Hartford and Newington will also be done at a cost of about $500 million.

Lastly, work to remove excess nitrogen found in untreated sewage, which harms plants and marine life, will cost about $250 million.  East Hartford and Windsor will see less work because the MDC already has spent significant amounts of money on their systems.

Two other referendums are planned for future construction, with one for $630 million in 2012 and another for $300 million in 2017. Those figures do not include inflation. 
The ballooning cost of the construction should put significant pressure on some town budgets already stretched to the limit.

"It's going to have an impact, people can only afford so much," said East Hartford Mayor Melody A. Currey.  "If we don't pass" the referendum "the federal government will take over," she said, "and I haven't seen much that the federal government has done to save us money."
Voters Asked To Buy $1.6 Billion Pig In A Poke;  MDC Sewer Upgrade Sketch Lacks Bottom-Line Details
By DANIEL E. GOREN, Courant Staff Writer
October 21, 2006

Voters living in the regional sewer authority's eight member towns are being asked to decide the fate of a $1.6 billion sewer upgrade project to fix what agency officials describe as a "massive" environmental and public health crisis.

But voters in Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield are going to have to decide whether to say "yes" or "no" without knowing exactly how much of the total bill is going to come out of their pockets.

With state and federal mandates forcing a referendum this November to pay for the first installment of the project - $800 million - the Metropolitan District Commission has renewed a debate over the fairest way to charge its members.

The discussion revolves around three methods: Linking the charge to local property taxes, adding an annual assessment to all MDC water customers or basing the cost on sewer use. The project, under any circumstances, is expected to lead to sharply higher annual payouts - but the hit could vary widely from one town to another, depending on which system is ultimately chosen.

Under the property tax method, for example, an average household in Hartford would pay $319 by 2016, while a West Hartford family would pay $771, MDC estimates show. But the burden would shift if MDC water customers ended up subsidizing the project. In that case, a Hartford family in 2016 would pay $468, while a West Hartford household would pay $697.

The sewer use system, which has few fans, would end up hitting residential customers the hardest, with an average annual payout of $860 by 2016.

"The unfortunate thing about this is that the voter is going to be asked to vote on something and all the details haven't been worked out," said Jeff Wright a commissioner from Newington who sits on the MDC's 29-member board. "It's like we are saying, `Buy this house now and we are going to work out the details later.'"

MDC officials said they came up with the new options in response to requests from member towns who wanted an alternative way to pay for the project. Officials said they would have liked to resolve the matter before the referendum, but federal and state mandates have forced the vote's timing.

The underlying problem is that during about 50 heavy rains a year, untreated sewage overflows into the region's rivers and the city's streets from pipes too old, too small and too few to handle the volume, agency officials said. At times, more than 300 basements in MDC member towns have flooded with raw sewage, officials said.

The problem is worst in Hartford, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Newington and West Hartford. The overflow also pollutes the Connecticut River and tributaries and Wethersfield Cove.

Both the state Department of Environmental Protection and the federal Environmental Protection Agency have ordered the MDC to fix the problem. The 15-year project, which has seen its scope and cost expand since the original 2004 estimate of $670 million, would repair and upgrade the overburdened system.

On Nov. 7, voters in the eight MDC towns will be asked to approve $800 million in borrowing to underwrite the cost of the project. Two more referendums are expected to follow - one for $500 million in about 2012; another for $300 million in about 2018, officials said. MDC officials say they will also seek federal and state grants to help defray the cost.

The work is to include expanding the Hartford sewage treatment plant and digging up 80 miles of roadway in Hartford - and possibly 40 more miles in neighboring towns - to separate pipes for water runoff and sewage. The MDC also will fix cracks in sewage pipes that let rain water in, enlarge pipes in certain areas and build underground storage tunnels to hold excess sewage and rain water until the treatment plant is ready to process it.

The project's scope has expanded to increase the treatment plant's ability to remove nitrogen from the effluent that is dumped into the Connecticut River. Too much nitrogen in the river can affect plant and animal life dramatically, officials said.

But while few argue about the necessity of the repairs, the high cost has led to discussion among member towns over how to split the price tag. Those discussions have led to the development of three possible scenarios.

In the first method, the MDC would continue using a system the agency has used for years to cover its operating and maintenance costs, which bases payments on a member town's property taxes.

In this system, homeowners in towns such as West Hartford - with higher residential property values, higher spending on services such as schools and a relatively small commercial tax base - end up paying more for sewer use. In Hartford - with lower residential property values and a larger commercial tax base - homeowners end up paying less.

This disparity - as well as the effect the project's high cost would have on each town's budget - has prompted a vigorous debate about whether the property tax-based system is the most equitable way to spread out the $1.6 billion.

"It has been a problem for us for a long time," said James Francis, town manager in West Hartford. "And when you add $1.6 billion on top of that, the problem multiplies in our mind. What it does is it makes the tax burden unbearable for us. At the end of this project, the MDC payment would be at least half of what the whole town side of our budget is."

On the other side of that debate are officials in Hartford. Lee Erdmann, the city's chief operating officer, said that Mayor Eddie A. Perez is still waiting for more data from the MDC, but is concerned about the prospect of Hartford getting hit hard. "He is very concerned that this is likely to shift cost to Hartford residents, and we have the poorest residents in the region," Erdmann said.
 
Dr. Mark Mitchell, president of the Hartford-based Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice, said Hartford should see larger benefits, not smaller. The city hosts the treatment plant, with its smells and risks, and allows other town's liquid waste to be piped under its streets.

"If there is an odor from the treatment plant, you can't smell it in Bloomfield," he said. "I think the amount of benefit to Hartford should be increased. Not just in lower taxes, but in getting its fair share for bearing the actual and potential risk that the surrounding suburbs don't bear."

An alternative to the property tax method gaining support in the suburbs would split the MDC's costs into two parts. Normal operating expenses would be paid for as always, using property taxes as the base.

The $1.6 billion capital project would then be covered by a "Clean Water Surcharge" the MDC would tack on to water-user bills in its eight member towns, as well as the five other towns that get MDC water: Farmington, South Windsor, Glastonbury, East Granby and Portland. This system would require approval from the state legislature.

MDC water customers currently pay $1.84 per 100 cubic feet of water they use. The new water charge would cause that figure to more than double within the next 10 years. The fee would be added in increments of 50 cents per 100 cubic feet every two years, reaching a $2 increase over the next 10 years, officials said.

Using this system, the disparity between what households pay in the MDC's suburban towns and what residents pay in the city of Hartford is lessened, and other towns would help shoulder the cost.

But Susan Bransfield, Portland's first selectwoman, said the idea of charging her town when it does not use the MDC's ailing sewer system is "grossly unfair." Portland buys water from the MDC for nearly 5,000 homes, but the town has its own sewers and treatment plant.

"We can't tolerate that," Bransfield said. "For us to pay for the sewage treatment plant and repairs they need to build seems to me highly inappropriate and it is definitely something I would have to protest and fight...You can't balance that bill on the backs of Portland residents."

MDC officials say that it's fair to ask other towns to help with the costs because everyone in the region benefits from cleaner rivers. But Bransfield argues that Portland already pays for its own sewer system to ensure the water it dirties is returned clean to the river, she said. And because Portland residents would not be allowed to vote on the $800 million referendum, charging them for the project would be "taxation without representation."

The third system being considered is a fee based on how much a household uses the sewers by flushing toilets, taking showers or doing laundry.

This method would increase a homeowners bill immediately by 30 percent, according to MDC officials, because it would eliminate any tax subsidy received from a town or city's commercial entities. Because this system would lead to even more drastic increases for homeowners, it is getting little traction.

What the MDC will do if the referendum fails is unclear, but agency officials said there are several possibilities.

The federal government could simply take over the process, forcing the project to move forward without local oversight, or it could take the MDC to court to enforce the mandate and begin fining the local agency each time the sewer system overflows.

The MDC also could push for legislative approval from the state to change the agency's charter, which now restricts the MDC from starting projects in excess of $5 million without a referendum.
MDC Commissioners claim CEO withheld studies
By: Ben Rubin, Journal Inquirer
10/12/2006

A group of five commissioners from the Metropolitan District Commission sent in a Freedom of Information Act request Tuesday to MDC's chief executive officer to retrieve three past studies saying that certain construction costs for a multibillion MDC project would be significantly above average figures.

The FOI request comes just before a Nov. 7 referendum question, asking residents in eight communities surrounding Hartford to bond $800 million as the first payment for a massive federally sanctioned $1.6 billion sewage system overhaul, called the Clean Water Project.

The FOI mentions that CEO Charles P. Sheehan declined to provide the studies after multiple e-mail requests. But Sheehan said Wednesday he would give the commissioners any information they want.

In Hartford, there is only one pipe for both sewage and street catchbasins, instead of the two that most cities have. In the first portion of the project, $420 million will go to separating the pipes into two - a process called "sewer separation" - which should relieve much of Hartford's persistent overflow problems.

Commissioner Jeffrey A. Wright, a Newington representative who took part in the FOI request, said the studies show that current estimates for sewer separation construction would be at $1,100 per foot, well above the $758 per foot estimate for other neighboring cities like Boston and Springfield.  Estimates for suburban communities was roughly $450 per foot, Wright, who is a certified financial planner, said.

"This is where a number of us have a lot of concern," Wright said.

"It's almost like taking $100 bills, folding them in half and setting them side by side by side for 60 miles in the city of Hartford," he added.  Wright said getting the $1,100 figure in writing has been very difficult, and required the FOI request.  Still, because the information is outdated and is now being revised, Sheehan said in an e-mail to Wright, presenting those three studies would create unfair comparisons for how much the project will cost and could present confusing data to town officials and the public.
Sheehan said the $1,100 figure is a worst-case scenario, "a very conservative estimate," and the MDC is working to reduce it, with "substantial room to lower the cost of the project."

"I'm trying to avoid giving him information that's been superceded. He can have any information he wants," Sheehan said, adding both he and Wright are now "on the same page" with the issue.

The first phase will pay for 40 to 45 miles of sewer separation, while the project will do a total of 80 miles, said Bob Weimar, the chief program manager for the project. These figures would mean that it would cost about $9 million a mile.

The MDC handles sewage and water needs for Hartford, East Hartford, Windsor, Bloomfield, West Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, and Rocky Hill. The MDC has 29 representatives from its member towns.

Upgrade Cost Doubles
By DANIEL E. GOREN, Courant Staff Writer
August 8, 2006

The price of a proposed billion-dollar upgrade to the sewer system in Hartford and its surrounding towns has nearly doubled, with the average household expected to see its sewer costs almost quadruple over the next 10 years, according to estimates by the Metropolitan District Commission.

The repair project, which would fix the outdated and overburdened sewer pipes in Hartford and seven other MDC member towns, was originally estimated in 2004 to cost at least $670 million and as much as $1 billion.

But MDC officials have now revamped their estimates, saying the 15-year project will cost $1.6 billion. The increase takes into account higher fuel costs, the skyrocketing price of construction and, most significantly, a leakage problem that has proven larger than expected, officials said.

"We may even be looking at more, depending on who you talk to," said Matt Nozzolio, the MDC spokesman.

The average household now pays about $14 a month, Nozzolio said. Taking into account state and federal grants that the district is expecting to put toward the cost of the project, households can expect an average cost of $50 a month in a decade, he said.

The MDC member towns are Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Newington, Wethersfield, Rocky Hill, Windsor and Bloomfield.

Hartford's 19th-century sewer pipes annually leak about 1 billion gallons of untreated sewage into local waterways such as the Connecticut River and Wethersfield Cove. The problem occurs during about 50 heavy rainfalls a year, when too much water enters the aging system, Nozzolio said. As a result, the state and federal governments have mandated that the MDC reduce the leakage.

The commission's board took a step toward fixing the problem Monday when its members approved an initial phase of the work for $800 million. The resolution, which passed 25-4, would place a referendum question on the ballot for the Nov. 7 election for the district's approval.

But Jeffrey A. Wright, a commissioner from Newington, voted against the project, saying the way the MDC decides how much its member towns must pay is not fair.

"We have seen the cost of this project mushroom on us, balloon on us," he said. "And while I think we ought to go forward with this project, because it is in the best interest of the people of the district, my concern is that we have not really talked about the cost on the individual households and the serious impact it is going to have on town budgets."

Currently, the MDC decides how much each town will pay in sewer costs by using a taxation method called "ad valorem," which in Latin means "according to value." This means each town's sewer costs are based on the assessed value of property in the town.

But Wright said that method has unfairly burdened towns such as West Hartford - which has more highly valued property - with more to pay. According to Wright, who said he worked on these numbers with the MDC, the average West Hartford household now pays $239 a year for sewer service. But in 2016, the average West Hartford house will pay an estimated $932 a year.

In contrast, Wright said, the average Hartford home now pays $81 a year but in a decade will pay $316 annually.