West Cape Residents Wary of Water Amnesty Ordinance

WEST CAPE MAY — Borough Commission delayed voting on an ordinance that would put mechanisms in place to allow some form of amnesty for those who have either been stealing water from the borough or inadvertently receiving water without paying for it.
The idea is about as popular with residents as listening to a leaky faucet dripping all night long. From 2003 to 2009, West Cape May had an unaccounted water loss of 121 million gallons valued at $695,000.
At a May 26 Borough Commission, Mayor Pamela Kaithern said the ordinance gave the commission the ability to offer amnesty but also to raise the penalty for those caught stealing water. She said commissioners would need to pass a resolution to actually create amnesty.
Kaithern told the larger-than-usual afternoon crowd that the commission would not vote on the water amnesty ordinance until the next Borough Commission night meeting on June 9 at 7 p.m. Commission did take public comment on the issue.
Kaithern said she saw amnesty as possible way to save the money of a “door-to-door investigation.” Eden Water Recovery, forensic accountants hired by the borough to investigate the lost water, recommend amnesty as one tool in the process, she said.
The mayor said the ordinance would double the penalty for stealing water from $1,000 to $2,000, 90-days of community service and the threat of jail time.
Borough Solicitor Frank Corrado said the borough could only process disorderly persons offenses of ordinance violations in municipal court.
“If they are charged with a crime, theft of services and indicted, the penalties are considerably larger,” he said.
Kaithern said the borough had replaced each customer’s water meter. Letters were sent to Cape May City from which West Cape May purchases its water and to the County MUA “expanding the circle of the investigation,” said the mayor.
Resident Kathy Gallagher said the West Cape May Taxpayers Association had offered to establish a committee to resolve the problem.
“Our feeling is going door-to-door is a lot simpler than waiting two months for some kind of answer that we do not have,” she said, referring to the forensic accountant.
Gallagher said the board of directors of the taxpayers association agreed to sponsor and to appeal to its members and all concerned citizens to petition to reconsider the amnesty program “and if necessary, call for a referendum on this issue.”
Resident Bud McDonough said a number of ratepayers had a problem with the word “amnesty” because it sounded like the borough would not prosecute those who voluntarily came forward.
Resident Tom Douglass said residents with wells should prove that is the source of water. He suggested they shut off their pump and see if water still runs inside their house. If it does, they are receiving municipal water.
Corrado said a warrant would be required if detectives went door-to-door checking resident’s source of water. He said an amnesty program does not have to grant “complete forgiveness,” or “criminal immunity.”
Borough Commission would set the terms and conditions of amnesty, he said.
Resident Norma Hawthorn asked for a definition of “amnesty,” and what forgiveness the borough may consider such as forgiving penalties or all money owed for water use.
Corrado said he drafted the water amnesty ordinance and was thinking of ways he could amend the language of the ordinance to address public concerns.
“We’re not talking about some sort of free pass for everybody that has stolen water in the borough,” he said.
Commissioner Ramsey Geyer said the borough flushed the water system each year, which involves opening 25 hydrants, letting the water run freely for a length of time which may use 200,000 to 500,000 gallons.
“That water is part of what ratepayers pay for because that is part of their safety,” he said.
Any water that goes through fire hydrants is not metered. Maintenance is performed on 65 fire hydrants each year which uses 700,000-800,000 gallons, said Geyer.
He said most utilities measure water used for flushing hydrants and is paid for by a municipality and not ratepayers. Geyer said some sprinkler systems in town made be connected in front of the meter connection and therefore the water is not metered.