West Cape May Considers Amnesty for Illegal Water Users

WEST CAPE MAY — Borough Commission introduced an ordinance May 12 that could allow amnesty for residents that have been receiving municipal water without paying for it.
The ordinance notes current borough ordinances do not contain a provision authorizing Borough Commission “to declare, when appropriate and with proper substantiation, a “water amnesty” for water users not in compliance with those requirement.”
The ordinance notes, “particularly in light of the borough’s recent “water loss” issue and the consequent need to identify all users, the Borough Commission believes that the authority to declare such a “water amnesty” is necessary for the borough’s best interests and for the public health, safety and welfare.”
An amnesty period would not exceed 90 days. The borough has been losing an average of 35 percent of the water it purchases monthly for residents from the City of Cape May.
Resident John Rowley said he believed it was an inopportune time to pass an amnesty ordinance since borough administration did not know the source of its water loss and how much water loss was occurring.
He asked the ordinance be abandoned until a forensic accountant delved further into the cause of the water loss. Rowley asked the date of the public hearing for the water ordinance be moved from May 26 at 1 p.m. to a night meeting when working folks would be able to attend.
Mayor Pamela Kaithern said a resolution would have to be passed by Borough Commission to actually allow amnesty.
“At this point all we are doing is setting up the mechanics which take time,” she said. “We don’t know exactly when we’re going to initiate it…”
Kaithern said the forensic accountant suggested the borough pass the ordinance as “one tool in the means of gaining control of the loss of water.”
She said the borough does not believe there are many illegal water connections.
“There may even be some people that don’t know they’re connected to city water because the hook up could have been done years ago, the property could have changed hands,” said the mayor.
Resident Bud McDonough asked why the borough would consider amnesty for someone who hasn’t received a water bill in years and had been knowingly taking water from the borough. He said residents who have been receiving water illegally should be back charged for the water they used.
McDonough asked if there were any penalties in place for illegally using municipal water.
Kaithern replied, “There were measures.”
The ordinance states the West Cape May Code is hereby amended to increase the maximum fine for a violation of any ordinance to $2,000.
Borough Solicitor Frank Corrado said the borough was introducing an ordinance that would give the borough the authority “from time to time, when it sees fit, to declare a water amnesty.” He said the ordinance was not declaring water amnesty.
Kaithern said the borough probably has a better chance of finding illegal water users more quickly through an amnesty program than through investigatory work.
Deputy Mayor Peter Burke said the ordinance would not give amnesty to someone identified as “taking water.” He said it was an easier process than going door-to-door or property to property looking for illegal connections.
Burke said the borough does not know if any resident is illegally connected to the water system.
Resident Pat Tucker asked what percentage of borough residents were connected to municipal water. Kaithern said the borough had about 800 accounts with roughly 1,000 properties in West Cape May.
Tucker commented it would not that difficult to investigate 200 properties.
Resident Kathy Gallagher, who has undertaken her own investigation of the borough’s water loss, said the volume of water lost could not be accounted for even with 200 illegal accounts.
“Why would we not set our investigation on an engineering study rather than a forensic audit?” she asked.
Gallagher said residents did not care what it cost to “unravel this nightmare, they want it fixed.”
She said her data found a water customer that in 2007 and 2008 used 24,000 gallons of water but in 2009 with a new water meter installed used about 10,000 gallons, making no changes in her household.
Gallagher said a borough employee should have uncovered the source of water loss.