The Ontario Clean?Water Agency (OCWA) is proposing major changes to the contract for operating and maintaining the water and wastewater systems in Moorefield and Drayton.
OCWA service representative David O’Connell said the idea is for OCWA to provide an agreement that covers the municipality for the next five years.
“Our main goal is to be as comprehensive as possible in our service provision but also provide you cost certainty for as long as possible,” O’Connell told council last week.
He explained the new contract would meet three main objectives:
– long-term cost certainty for the municipality;
– maximization of operational services; and
– provide an all-inclusive operation and maintenance package.
In recent years the municipality and OCWA have signed short-term “cost-plus” contracts.
Last October the township approved a “cost-plus” contract for 2010 valued at $156,523 – up 8.1% over the 2009 cost of $144,773. But those figures are estimates only; the actual year-end cost can be higher or lower depending on the work required and possible problems during the year.
The actual 2009 reconciled total was $182,278.
OCWA is proposing a fixed price agreement under which OCWA officials say they assume more risk within the operational budget.
“The longer term contracts provide operational stability and security for both parties,” O’Connell said in his presentation to council. An additional benefit for the municipality, he added, is stabilized annual budgets with predictable growth.
“Most municipalities in the area have been switching to the fixed price,” he told council.
But while a “fixed price” may help at budget time every year, the actual price could very well fluctuate from year to year, as it does now.
“At the end of the year, if there is a fluctuation, positive or negative, we either give money back to the municipality or, as is often the case, there are additional expenses that are invoiced to the municipality,” said O’Connell.
Under the proposed five-year contract, OCWA officials would bring bills to council in the early part of the year to explain the reasons for any cost overruns the previous year.
Services that were previously excluded in OCWA agreements are now included in the pricing, at a total additional cost of $32,700, including $7,500 for extra labour and $4,060 for miscellaneous costs.
Specific new services for the water systems in Drayton and Moorefield include:
– lead sampling ($5,240);
– Drinking Water Quality Management System yearly maintenance, including revisions to the plan, internal audit and management review ($5,000);
– annual inspections on the wells, tank and reservoir;
– all maintenance items, including chemical lines and injectors;
– hydrant and blow-off flushing program; and
– fire flow pressure testing.
New services for the wastewater systems include the annual purchase of ultraviolet bulbs ($2,300) and the replacement of sensors at the Drayton lagoon.
New general services include 12 call-ins per year for the systems ($3,600), a capital allowance of $5,000 per year, annual servicing and fuel for the back-up generators, and the continued employment of the full-time dedicated operator (Dwight Hallahan has been the full-time operator in Mapleton for just over a year).
Combined with the basic costs, the new services will bring the total proposed cost for 2011 to $189,219 – about 4% higher than the total reconciled cost for 2009.
O’Connell says the services and pricing will cover all aspects of operational services in the township.
“OCWA commits to provide a comprehensive package of services to the community,” he said. “We believe this is the best long-term strategy for the operations, compliance, security and financial stability for Mapleton.” He noted the five-year contract proposal represents a continued commitment from OCWA to deliver reliable services at good value.
“It’s a more comprehensive package,” O’Connell said in an interview on Monday. “Typically, longer term contracts are better for everyone involved.”
Public works director Larry Lynch asked if under the new contract the township would still be responsible for locating and repairing any water line breaks. O’Connell replied yes, noting OCWA is the operator but the township is still responsible to locate and repair such problems. OCWA only needs to be involved if the water quality is in jeopardy, he said, and the township is still responsible for operating valves on the water mains “and OCWA can help if required in the area.”
Councillor Jim Curry asked if OCWA bears any responsibility if the township is unable to meet the requirements for spring discharge into the Conestogo River and has to conduct an emergency discharge – as it did in 2008.
“I would say we’d have to cross that bridge when we come to it,” O’Connell replied. “But … we’d do all we can not to allow that to happen.”
He also noted, “We’re in a much better position now than we were two years ago, when that situation last occurred.”
Council will discuss the contract in the coming months.
