Dear Editor:
Earlier this year in June the majority republican council rejected a minor “municipal tax increase” to remedy the past practice of using water and sewer surplus to compensate for budget shortfalls. The proposed increase would cost local taxpayers an average of $4.32. Based on the 2019 average for Parsippany, an average home is valued at $310,736.00. If not mistaken this would have paid for the needed water and sewer infrastructure that is in need of repairs and upgrades.
Three Wells Down and more
We now have 3-Wells down due to water deficiency; one well-having contamination issues that cannot be accommodated through treatment and land use issues. Other infrastructure issues such as pipes also exist. Now that we need money for the water sewer system, we are lacking. Water is also in the highest water deficit in the region, due to usage, depletion, and lack of recharge due mostly to overdevelopment.
Equitable or Not, Fee or Tax?
Administration officials at the time came up with the Tax increase mentioned above. A partisan cry went up against any such tax increase no matter how meager, apparently affording to live in an average home of $310,000 a five dollar or less increase would somehow break their budget.
Now we have an increase in the water and sewage fees, which are even more of an increase. Is not a fee another word for tax, and how is a fee more acceptable than a tax?
Referendum not suggested
Why was this issue building for many years; but ignored not put to a referendum, as to which method would be fairer to all according to their means suggested, a tax or a fee. For example; we all now pay a set fee for sewage $71; and our water bill has increased for minimum users $8.00+.
The contention is, that minimum user of water are the losers, in this short change increase. If all pay $71, no matter their incomes; but ignored for their minimum use, or conservation, they are being held to pay for excessive users, in their sewage increase. My bill rarely exceeded $60 for sewer at minimum usage; paying more in summer, than winter. Although increased water use brings higher costs the sewage fee will now remain the same; no matter if we don’t know how many times anyone flushes the toilet we know that increased use is part of the equation in sewage plant use, and all water goes past the meter, be it toilet or swimming pool.
Was the $4.38 Average Increase a fantasy or a possible solution?
Lastly, if the $4.38 average in it’s cumulative could actually pay for the needed infrastructure required and more;( 11-14 jobs lost) this new fee increase will gain us even more in surplus, so will it again be foolishly used as before, with no future thought of entropy of the aging system or wells having been depleted due to consumption, drawdown or contamination? Contaminations caused by private sources that we are now responsible for in costs, and quality of life issues, in the overdeveloped landscape of Parsippany. What good has the ratable chase done for the average taxpayer in the long term?
Last Example: Water utility bill minimum use $79.76, New Increase minimum use $111.43… An increase of $31.67… An increase of roughly $10-$11 a month … So what was the noise about an average $5.00 a month increase?
Nick Homyak
Lake Hiawatha 07034
