Comments on: Court asked to force couple to use township water

By: Token Conservative · Daily Briefing 04/29/10

Token Conservative · Daily Briefing 04/29/10 — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 05:34:32 +0000

[…] This sounds as bad as the individual mandate, requiring people to pay for water that they aren’t using. At least it’s a local policy. […]

By: gitarcarver

gitarcarver — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:32:41 +0000

Not for nothing, but in my neck of the woods, the water bill is for water used, sewage, and a connection fee. The sewage fee is based upon gallons of water used.

I am wondering if, in this case, if the issue isn’t really the metering of sewage which is done on the front end – ie water being used.

The Burkets may be using the benefit of the sewage system without paying for it as there is no metering of the water going into the house.

While I agree that the Burkets should not be forced to use water from the town, they should also not reap the benefit of using the city’s sewage and treatment plants to dispose of their waste.

If the issue really is about the metering of water for sewage, then perhaps the Beckets should be required to put in a septic tank / leech field (good luck with that). Failing that, the better solution might be to put the meter on the well water line and read that, thus giving the city the number of gallons used from the well water that went into the city sewage system and was treated.

Bill the Beckets for that amount and move on.

By: Jeff Hall

Jeff Hall — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:12:20 +0000

I had some Army buddies from the Altoona area. Nice guys, but I always suspected that they put something in the water there.

By: Doug

Doug — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:58:22 +0000

or they don’t want other homeowners to do what this people are doing because others will want to do it, thus raising water rates up for the remainder.

By: VMS

VMS — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 23:05:56 +0000

Usually there is a connection fee and a per gallon used fee on top of that. The power company will lose money if y0u are connected to 200 amp service and you use zero killowatt hours each month. All water utitlites are different in their billing structure, but I surmise that this water is metered in addition to a connection fee.

I always look for an ulterior motive when the cost of litigation seems excessive compared to winning everything you are asking for. Maybe the ground water is polluted, and for some reason the town doesn’t want to tell anyone.

By: Jim Nelson

Jim Nelson — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 20:27:28 +0000

Yeah, I’m inclined to think there’s something we’re not being told. If I had to guess, my theory would be that the monthly fee is just for the connection and that you have to pay more to actually buy the water. If that’s the case, then it’s an important detail that should have been reported.

My sympathies would still be with the homeowners. You shouldn’t be forced to buy something that: a) you don’t want; b) you don’t need; and c) makes you sick. But the township’s behavior would be a lot easier to understand if it turned out that this was basically about money.

By: Todd Rogers

Todd Rogers — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:04:47 +0000

It does seem suspiciously excessive for the township to do all this, given the potential of the outcome – UNLESS there’s more than is being reported.

By: Jim Nelson

Jim Nelson — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 18:18:50 +0000

What I can’t find in the stories you link to is any indication of why the city is pressing this. Apparently, the rationale for the ordinance is to generate funds, and to prevent cross-contamination of the public water supply. But the defendants say that they are paying the water fee, and the well water isn’t contaminating the public supply. Assuming that’s true, what is the harm being done to the township if these people don’t actually use the water?

It’s possible that the law may be on the township’s side here (I have no idea), but I’m wondering why the city considers it worthwhile to spend the time and money pursuing it.

By: A.W.

A.W. — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:08:33 +0000

the modern liberal state. you have the right to abortion and gay sex, but not the right to decide what kind of water to drink.

seriously, if i was the judge here, i would cite lawrence and be done with it.

By: wfjag

wfjag — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:25:06 +0000

If you visit Clays-burg city,
You will find it very pretty.
Just two things of which you must beware —
You must drink the water and you must breathe the air.

Prosecution! Prosecution! It’s a simple melody.
Drinking bottled wa-ter, is a minor felony.