• County and towns may be closer to working out differences over 2004 contract.

By NICOLE CARTRETTE
Staff Writer

Changing the terms of a contract after parties have signed the dotted line doesn’t happen everyday.
But the Columbus County Board of Commissioners might just get that chance – at least that’s what they are asking three municipalities to consider.

The county is asking the towns of Boardman, Cerro Gordo and Fair Bluff to consider changing terms in a 2004 inter-local sewer agreement that, among other things, would allow the county to increase fees to the towns after six months, not a year.

County estimates show the system costing about 10 cents more per 1,000 gallons to operate than the towns’ consultant has estimated.

“We would like to change the agreement such that in the middle of the year we can have our auditors come in and say, no, this isn’t working or (vice versa),” Interim County Manager Leo Hunt said. At that time the county could adjust the rates accordingly, he added.

“That’s only fair to both the towns and the county,” Hunt said.

“I want the issues resolved,” Commissioner James Prevatte said. “One of the things we have talked about is (the provision) that we must wait a year to adjust rates.

“I think that clause is going to be taken out,” he said.

Prevatte said the county would still be responsible for maintenance and checking pumps and lines but this would enable the county to ensure it would be at no cost to taxpayers.

“Mr. Hunt and Mr. Leonard have worked out their concerns – now it’s just simply getting it corrected,” Prevatte said.

Leonard said Thursday the town boards will have to approve any revisions to the contract but he believes, through discussions with them, that they are willing to consider changes. “It is my belief it will be accepted by the municipalities,” Leonard said, but added that the actual changes have not been finalized.

Leonard said he’s hopeful that the Board of Commissioners will okay an agreement that can then be taken back to and approved by the towns.

Leonard said he understands that commissioners don’t want the agreement to “be a money loser” and that any ambiguities in the document are clarified.

“Working with Interim County Manager Leo Hunt has been very productive,” Leonard said. “He has an open door policy and he has been great to work with.

“I have spoken with every commissioner. They have reached out to try to make this be a win-win (for the county and the towns) and I think their intentions are honorable,” Leonard said.

The request follows a series of negotiations that in some instances appeared to only increase tensions between the towns waiting on the $9 million sewer system funded completely with grants and the county concerned, about excessive costs the contract might not cover and would fall back on the county.

“I’m here in support of what we tried to do a couple of years ago,” former Fair Bluff Mayor J.B. Evans told the board during its Nov. 5 meeting. “We thought we had a pretty good agreement and we certainly want you to work on it as quick as you can.

“That agreement can hold up everything.”

Prevatte didn’t see it as the county dragging its feet.

“We asked Al Leonard to come back in 60 days to make a proposal,” Prevatte declared of the towns’ consultant. “I’m still waiting to hear from Mr. Leonard. Maybe he will make that presentation at our next meeting.”

The towns’ officials and Leonard didn’t see it that way.

Leonard said he was told by the former county manager to meet with county attorney Steve Fowler.

Leonard described the attempted communications as frustrating and went on the record with the Tabor-Loris Tribune to say Fowler had essentially wasted his time by canceling meetings, not returning phone calls and finally sending a letter that basically told Leonard he needed to go through the county commissioners.

The county had not provided the necessary information to put the electric supply to one of the pumps in the county’s name, according to an engineer on the project.

The 2004 inter-local agreement involving the towns, the county and Fairmont, which will treat the sewage, ensured the towns would not lose $9 million in grants for sewer infrastructure.

The county at that time agreed to operate and maintain certain parts of the system in exchange for certain set fees in the contract.

County staff told commissioners months ago they had concerns that the fees were too low to cover the county’s actual costs associated with meeting the terms of the contract.

That was shocking news to some commissioners who were told by previous administration in 2004 that the arrangement would be at no cost to the county.

Complicating the situation was the reality that Columbus County Water District II did not include the incorporated areas where the sewer would be available. The idea that taxpayers in that water district (who pay special water district taxes on property there) might have to cover excess costs on a sewer system unavailable to them frustrated some board members.

Commissioners wanted a guarantee that it wouldn’t cost the county but it seemed that no one could make any guarantees – customer numbers were estimates and the county not having operated such a system before left unclear what the actual costs would total.

While Leonard and the county staff continued to meet to work out the concerns, action or progress on the matter seemed to be very slow.

Commissioners asked Leonard to show them that the system would not cost the county. Leonard agreed to provide additional figures, and did.

Those figures were very close to the county’s figures and different only by 10 cents per 1,000 gallons of sewage – meaning an average bill for 4,000 gallons would have a fee increase of 40-cents.

Those figures did not change the fact the terms of the contract had already been voted on in 2004. At that time, Leonard reiterated that as far as the towns were concerned they had a valid agreement that they believed all parties were okay with when it was adopted.

Leonard said Thursday he believed the parties were much closer to reaching a compromise and he would be on the commissioners’ next agenda to discuss the agreement and financial matters.

That discussion will likely take place at the Nov. 19 commissioners meeting.