Need for bond issue questioned
City defends upgrades to water, sewer services.

By Dave Moore of the Tribune’s staff
Published Thursday, October 2, 2003

If supporters for the city’s Nov. 4 water and sewer bond issues were expecting an uneventful campaign, they weren’t anticipating last night’s Boone County Smart Growth Coalition meeting.

Members of the coalition used the city’s presentation about the water and sewer issue as a chance to claim that most of the projects promoted in both issues would result in urban sprawl.

In response, members of the city’s staff said most of the money would be spent maintaining and improving sewer and water service within the existing city limits. Still, they said, it’s difficult to label which project would serve new growth and which would benefit existing residents.

A good example would be the roughly $1.2 million upgrade of the Clear Creek sewer pump station, which Columbia Public Works Director Lowell Patterson says needs to be replaced anyway.

But Smart Growth panelist Joe Binbeutel, who lives near the proposed 489-acre Phillips Farm development, said expanding the pump station’s capacity would simply invite more development.

He expressed particular concern about the Little Bonne Femme Watershed, which includes Rock Bridge State Park.

Binbeutel was among about 40 people who attended the meeting last night at the Roger B. Wilson Boone County Government Center.

Though most of those who spoke agreed that Columbia’s water and sewer rates are competitive with other cities, they weren’t as confident that the city was planning ahead with its utility extensions.

If both issues are approved, the combined sewer and water bill of the average Columbia household would jump by $6.22 a month by the year 2009, according to information provided by the city.

"Is this sewer issue going to control growth, or contribute to it?" asked John Coffman, a panelist for the meeting. "I think development follows sewer lines. There’s a lot of concern that Proposition 1" - the sewer issue - "is designed for growth outside the city."

But City Manager Ray Beck said that city services haven’t extended beyond what was planned in the early 1970s. He said development would continue even if the city doesn’t extend its sewer lines.

Private developments with small sewage treatment plants often contribute to groundwater pollution, Beck said.

"But I don’t think the county is that permissive" in allowing new development anymore, said panelist Jan Weaver.

In response to a question from Weaver about how the city decides where to extend sewer lines, Beck suggested that it’s usually in reaction to proposed development.

Beck said city sewer lines can only guide - not assure - the direction of development, to which Coffman replied: "Do we need to be guiding it that much in the direction of Clear Creek?"

Smart Growth panelist and member Ben Londeree said he estimated that about 65 percent of the $18.5 million sewer bond issue and the $28.3 million water issue would go toward new development.

He referred to specific sewer line extensions, upgrades of sewer pump stations and added water-treatment capacity.

City Public Works Director Lowell Patterson has said that if any projects could be considered primarily expansion, it would be the $6 million sewer extension.

Not raising much attention was the city’s water-service levy, Proposition 2. The $28.3 million issue includes a $6.3 million expansion of the city’s McBaine water-treatment plant and the addition of a second water main.

"If the fire had been at the Heidelberg two days earlier, we would have been under watering restrictions," said Dick Malon, the director of the city’s Water and Light Department.

The issue would also set aside $6 million to increase water pressure to northeast Columbia.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reach Dave Moore at (573) 815-1708 or dmoore@tribmail.com.