Â
By KEVIN NEVERS
The towns of Chesterton and Porter have apparently reached an understanding,
ending months of acrimony, frustration, and threats of litigation.
At a special joint meeting Monday night, the Chesterton Utility Service
Board voted 5-0 to endorse a new intermunicipal agreement which sets the
terms of Porter’s purchase of additional capacity at the wastewater
treatment plant. The Chesterton Town Council then voted 4-0 to approve that
agreement.
The Porter Town Council is expected to vote on the agreement at its own
meeting at 7:30 p.m. today.
Under that agreement, Porter would over the next five years increase the
total amount of capacity reserved for it at the wastewater treatment plant
by 380,000 gallons per day (gpd), from 513,000 gallons per day (gpd) to
893,000 gpd or by nearly 75 percent, at a total cost of $1,786,000 or $4.70
per gallon.
Porter would receive the first installment of 170,000 gpd immediately, after
making a payment to the Utility of $799,000 due upon execution of the
agreement. Then, beginning next year, It would receive five more annual
installments of 42,000 gpd after making a payment of $197,400 due on or
before Sept. 1 of each year.
Should Porter fail to make any of the scheduled payments, according to the
agreement, the capacity available for purchase at the particular purchase
date would no longer be available. At any time in the future, on the other
hand, Porter would have the right to request additional capacity to be
negotiated with the Utility unless the Utility determines, “in its sole
discretion, that it does not have sufficient capacity available over and
beyond projected future needs of Chesterton to sell to Porter.”
The new intermunicipal agreement—which supersedes the old one of 1984 and
would expire on Feb. 20, 2026 but could be extended for an indeterminate
number of 10-year periods thereafter—covers a range of other issues as well
which have emerged over the last few years. In particular it includes a
breach-of-capacity clause, under which Porter, should it exceed its capacity
allotment for four consecutive days in any billing period, would pay a
25-percent initial surcharge penalty for all flow in excess of its capacity;
and, should it exceed its capacity allotment for five or more days, would
pay a 50-percent initial surcharge penalty. In the event of a further
four-day violation in a single billing period, Porter would pay a 25-percent
enhanced surcharge penalty on the total monthly rate for all effluent
treated by the plant; and in the event of a further five-day violation,
would pay a 50-percent enhanced surcharge penalty.
In the wake of the Porter Town Council’s threat last year to condemn the
wastewater treatment plant—located on League Lane in the Town of Porter—the
new municipal agreement also makes a few matters crystal clear:
•In its purchase and reservation of capacity, Porter would “in no way” be
entitled “to any possessory, proprietary, or ownership rights in the plant
or any other personal or real property” belonging to Chesterton. “Porter
agrees that Chesterton owns the plant, the right to operate, maintain, and
expand such facility, and shall have sole discretion as to the methods of
operation.”
•Porter would agree to maintain the zoning classification of the 19.85 acres
on which the plant is located so as to preserve “the ability of Chesterton
to operate said facility.”
•Porter would agree not to use, during the lifetime of the agreement,
“eminent domain or any other legal process” in an attempt to acquire the
plant.
In addition, the new intermunicipal agreement would obligate Porter to
exercise “due diligence” in reducing, if not eliminating, the amount of
stormwater, ground seepage, and infiltration introduced in its sanitary
sewer system for treatment by the plant. In practice, Porter would be
required to complete within the next year a study of its system “with
cameras and any additional investigation devices,” to prepare a written
report within the next 15 months on the results of that study including a
plan for corrective action, and in a “timely” fashion to implement and
complete that plan. Porter would be required too to submit an annual
infiltration and inflow report to the Service Board no later than Dec. 1
during the lifetime of the agreement.
Finally, the new intermunicipal agreement would obligate Porter to enact
within 30 days a “mirror ordinance” of Chesterton Town Code, Chapter 25,
Article III, Division I, which establishes the Utility’s sanitary sewer
pre-treatment requirements as mandated by the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM). And any future amendments to that portion
of Chesterton Town Code would have to be similarly mirrored by Porter Town
Code.
After the votes, Associate Town Attorney Chuck Parkinson took a moment to
thank Chesterton’s negotiating team, Service Board President Larry Brandt,
Service Board Member Jim Raffin, and Council President Sharon Darnell,
D-4th. “This couldn’t have been possible without their efforts,” he said,
then added that “both sides come out on top in this agreement.”
For his part Brandt extended his gratitude to Porter Town Council members
Bill Sexton, R-1st, and Sandra Snider, R-5th, for their “extremely well-run
professional negotiation.”
“Politics,” observed Council Member Jim Ton, R-1st, “is the art of
compromise and both sides issued an attitude that made compromise possible.”
Â
Posted 9/12/2006
Â
Â