Resident in BarnardDecember 29, 2012 10:02 PM
If the water tower still holds water, why do we need a new one?
ReplyDelete
I will answer your question, however, I'll end up paying dearly for what I will say.
To answer your question…
At one time, I did support the building of the new standpipe with the preservation of the current water tower. I agree that the old tower cannot continue being used without substantial repair; an engineer did say there should be no problem with it standing there as a landmark. However, after reading the engineer reports and grant applications and visiting with former Barnard city officials and Lincoln County officials, I no longer support the construction of a new standpipe under any condition.
The current water tower in Barnard has a capacity of 50,000 gallons. According to the paperwork, the standpipe structure is 8ft by 120ft and will contain about 1 day’s water usage (approximately 10,000 gallons). From city council discussions I have witnessed, the actual capacity of the new standpipe is to be between 7,500 and 10,000 gallons. The importance of the new water tower is for fire protection and a water reservoir. The last couple of fires in Barnard have drained the current tower in a matter of a few minutes. Residents have also experienced frequent loss of water because of the low level kept in the tower.
The engineer reports and grant narratives supplied by the city state that there is sufficient pressure from the rural water district to operate the water system in the city. As one retired county employee pointed out, when the tower runs out, the valve to the water district must be opened. When the valve is opened, not only is the tower being filled, but the pressure from the rural water district is also providing the pressure to operate the city water system. This indicates that the reports about sufficient water pressure are correct.
I had the opportunity to visit with a member of a water board of a county in northeast Kansas. I supplied the information about population, water usage, and project cost including bond issues and grants. He explained to me about the design and capacity issues with the standpipes. The typical design of the cylindrical standpipes differs from the water tower we currently have. The current water tower has an elevated tank which provides consistent pressure; the typical cylindrical standpipe is basically a vertical tank. IF the new standpipe that the city has commissioned is typical in design, there may possibly be pressure issues. He explained how the hydrostatic head affects water system pressure. If the capacity is only 7,500 to 10,000 gallons in a non-elevated tank, the lower the water level is, the lower the pressure may be. Up to one-half of the capacity of the standpipe may be useless in regards to pressure.
Cost is a factor in these projects. A 50,000 gallon standpipe would cost approximately $450,000, which was confirmed by the city’s reports. When the member of the water board was informed of the project cost of $270,000, the population of about 70 people, and the statement by the council that more general obligation bonds may have to be issued, in addition to the $108,000 already issued, he had questions about the fiscal responsibility of the project. The concern centers around the necessity of that kind of expenditure in a community the size of Barnard as well as the ability to pay off the debt.
The $108,000 in issued bonds is the city’s portion of the $270,000 project cost. According to a former Barnard mayor and Lincoln County commissioner, the amount of the bond issue may double at the 30 year mark depending on the interest rate at which the bonds were sold. Potentially, the city may have to pay back $216,000 in debt. Barnard has generally declined in population as shown by census figures that I have previously published on the Banter. During the period between 2000 and 2010, Barnard lost 43% of its population. Since there is little to no economic development, the draw to Barnard is low property values with very limited living accommodations, and the general indication of the census numbers is of declining population…it may be challenging for the future population of Barnard to pay off that debt. In addition, the city clerk reportedly said to a resident that the city would be adding on an additional fee once the new standpipe was completed. The fee would be $20 and would apply only to vacant properties that were not subscribing to city water services. The fee would be monthly and last the duration of the bond issue. Several residents expressed concern over the legality of this fee and an inquiry was made to the Lincoln County attorney in that regard. Currently, the minimum for city utilities is $57.48. In the project materials, it is stated that Barnard’s water costs are already above the state average. During council discussions, another $20 will be added to the water bill making the minimum bill $77.48 not taking to consideration any normal increases in trash, sewage, or water costs.
In my honest opinion, I believe that the city council has taken on more than Barnard can handle. Research has indicated that failure to pay off debt is a leading cause of municipalities losing their incorporation. However, during a visit with the Lincoln County Clerk, losing incorporation would be unlikely in this case. If Barnard were to default on the bonds, the first step would be to issue No-Fund Warrants. This would allow Barnard to borrow from other funds that it has. This is what happened a few years ago when Barnard wasn’t able to pay Lincoln County for paving the streets. In addition, Barnard would be expected to levy taxes and increase fees in order to cover the deficit. This could drastically increase the cost of living in Barnard. By this time, a bonding agent would become involved to guide the city out of the situation.
However you look at it, Barnard could potentially be in deep fiscal trouble. Based on the information studied, maybe the best option is to not have a new standpipe and run off of the rural water district.
