Colchester Governance Committee
January 2014
DRAFT Findings and Recommendations on Fire District Governance in Colchester
Introduction
The Colchester Selectboard tasked the Governance Committee,
an ad hoc advisory committee, with making a recommendation regarding the supply
and management of the Town’s water and/or wastewater management and fire
protection services. The Heritage Project Report, in its discussion of
Governance, recommends that the “Leaders of Colchester and other chartered
corporations appoint a team to evaluate the potential benefits of consolidation
of Colchester’s fire and water/sewer districts and their relationship to Town
of Colchester governance” (Objective 1, Action 2). Action 3, of the same report,
further charged the Committee to energetically pursue regionalization,
including, but not limited to, fire and water services.
Recommendation
Given these directives, the Governance
Committee identified several key challenges with the existing political
structure of water management. The Committee also familiarized itself with Fire
District governance within Colchester’s boundaries and discussed possible
approaches to the problems identified. The problems and solutions are described
below.
The Committee was not able to
recommend any single solution as we feel it requires considerably more input,
expertise, time and effort than the Committee has available. Instead, the
Committee recommends following the lead of "Action 2" mentioned
above; the formation of a new committee tasked specifically with this
issue. This Water Management
committee must contain representatives from each Fire District, the Champlain
Water District, the Town and the Town's citizens. A solution to the Town's
water management problems cannot be solved without the expertise,
participation, cooperation and consent of all interested parties: the
Fire Districts and their voters, the Town and its voters, and the Champlain
Water District.
Governance Overview
The January edition of Currently
Colchester offered a concise background of the governance of Fire and Water
Service provision within Colchester.
This article is available upon request from the Town. In brief it states that, “Water supply
and fire protection service in the Town of Colchester are provided by five
distinct entities for water and three fire departments, all operating under
different forms of governance structures, boards and bylaws. These organizations were formed out of
necessity, as the Town did not wish to pay for this infrastructure or service
at the time they were established.”
Challenge Identification
The Governance Committee began their investigation by
identifying challenges stakeholders experience within the current Governance
Structure. They are as follows:
· Customer confusion: Many of
Colchester’s residents, particularly new residents, do not understand the
governance of publicly supplied water and fire protection services in
Colchester. There is often
confusion about whom to contact regarding water sources, quality or cost. Fire protection services are simpler, from
a user’s perspective, but their governance is also complex. Questions regarding water and fire services often land with
the Town, as a coordinating agent, and divert resources and productivity from
other tasks.
· Developer confusion: Chapter 14 of Colchester’s Code of Ordinances deals
with Construction Standards Applicable to Land Development. This as an adoption
of Champlain Water District’s codes with some modifications. However, each Fire District has its own
by-laws that can be in conflict with these codes (an example is when plastic
pipe can be used for water main extensions).
Developers operating in Colchester face complex and sometimes conflicting regulatory
structures, discouraging well
planned economic development.
· Crisis
resolution: Customer confusion is
further strained in moments of crisis.
When a crisis occurs (such as a water main break) citizens do not know
whom to call. Several entities (Town, Fire District and water provider) may be
involved in the management and repair of the situation.
· Roadblocks
to Town Planning: The number of players involved inhibits
Coordination of infrastructure development. Town ordinances and State statutes
mandate planning and public review procedures for town growth, under the
auspices of the Town. They do not specifically describe how Fire Districts,
tasked with providing an important infrastructure for that growth, fit into the
planning and review process.
· Distortion
of voter representation, review and participation in Town planning. Each Fire District represents a geographic portion
of the Town yet the water and fire service they provide must be integrated into
the development and implementation of environmental and infrastructure planning
of the Town at-large. A single Fire District can have an inordinate influence
on projects that have already been approved by the Selectboard and subjected to
a town-wide review process. The
current structure essentially vests key planning and development decisions with
the Fire Districts, which can result in a conflict-prone governance
misalignment.
· Sewer
allotment billing inefficiencies:
Collecting fees for payment of the Town’s sewer allotments involves contacting
and processing information from several water districts. Though the Committee
did not do a detailed cost analysis of this process it is said to be manual and
overly time-consuming.
· Fire protection accountability and management: The
billing of fire protection services is not completely understood by the
Governance Committee. If fire
protection budgets are developed by each Fire District and submitted to the
Town for approval and payment, this would seem to make oversight of those
expenses difficult and inhibit town-wide coordination of capital expenditures
for fire protection.
· Transparency,
accountability, & participation: The Fire Districts have limited staffing
and hours of operation, which saves ratepayers money, but also limits
administrative capacity to respond to changing times. Obtaining public information about the management of the
districts is not reflective of citizens’ expectations in an electronic
information age. Limited access
and transparency may result in a low level of participation and therefore
accountability.
Governance Committee Member Education
Though several of the Governance Committee members have had
considerable experience working with Colchester’s Fire Districts, others have
not. An effort was made to inform those members of how Fire Districts relate to
state statute; what their powers and responsibilities are and how they operate.
A copy of the 1961 state statute organizing Colchester’s Fire Districts was
obtained as well as the by-laws of Fire District No. 2 (FD#2) and Fire District
No. 3 (FD#3). FD#3 also provided a
copy of their most recent budget and audit report. The October 24th
meeting of the Governance Committee was devoted to discussion of the Fire
Districts. Representatives from each were invited and attended. One committee
member contacted town clerks in other Vermont towns with multiple Fire
Districts as well as the town clerks and/or Public Works departments of towns
with a similar population size as Colchester’s. One committee member also
attended a recent FD#3 Prudential Committee meeting as a private citizen and
customer, not as a member of the Governance Committee. Committee members had
informal discussions with citizens and administrative officials regarding the
Fire Districts and Colchester’s water management future.
Considerations
Water infrastructure (water supply, waste water removal and
storm water management) directly influences the health, quality of life, and
economic growth of a community.
Environmental considerations and regulations have increased the cost and
complexity of water management. This trend may well continue. Colchester
citizens concerned about the quality of their water supply, the health of Lake
Champlain and the ability of Colchester to manage its economic growth need an
understandable, transparent and responsive governmental structure responsible
for water management. The Governance Committee is concerned not only with the
immediate solution to the problems identified but also with establishing a
governmental structure that will serve the community well into the future.
The Governance Committee realizes that each Fire District is
a distinct political entity separate from the Town and chartered by State
statute. Fire Districts are primarily answerable to their voters and customers.
The Selectboard does not have the wherewithal to force Fire Districts to merge
or modify their by-laws. That power resides in the Prudential Committees, Fire
District voters and Vermont State statute.
The Governance Committee is fully aware of the valuable
services each Fire District has provided the Town and values the civic
commitment of their employees and Prudential Committees. The Committee realizes that several of
these recommendations will disrupt the lives of many of Colchester’s most
dedicated citizens. But the Town of Colchester has outgrown its current
fragmented water management political organization and needs a more responsive
and efficient approach. These proposals hope to initiate the development of
such an approach.
The Governance Committee is also aware of the tradition and
culture of Vermont’s Volunteer Fire Departments and Colchester’s in particular.
The spirit of cooperation among Fire Departments has resulted in smooth
operations and citizen satisfaction.
While the Committee does not see a need to change fire protection
governance, fire protection services are linked to water services through the
same governing entity, and so fire and water services, provided by the Fire
Districts, must concomitantly be considered. Our recommendations, however, primarily address water
services.
Recommendations Considered
The Committee identified several possible approaches. They
are provided here in no particular order but are numbered for ease of reference.
1)
Leave the
current structure intact but suggest improved coordination of information.
Selectboard and/or Town officials will work with the Prudential Committees of
the three Fire Districts to develop standard operating procedures for citizen
inquiries and crisis reporting. A portion of the Town’s website be devoted to
explaining water resources and fire protection services. An effort should be made to educate new residents regarding
water billing systems.
The Town should implement a
procedure to receive direct and reliable information regarding all Prudential
Board meetings of all Fire Districts. This could take the form of a citizen of
each Fire District designated to attend and report on proceedings. The Fire Districts should also find a
way to electronically post all documents of public interest: bylaws/charter, budget, warrants, audits,
policies, agendas, minutes, prudential committee contact information, staff
contact information etc.
The Fire Districts could also
create a position funded by all interested parties and with Town office space to
coordinate Fire District information and serve as the focal point for all
citizen inquiries. This office will develop, review and modify Fire District
by-laws to make them consistent throughout Colchester. In addition the office will
perform development review on behalf of the Fire Districts, and serve as a
coordinator for municipal planning to include both land use and infrastructure
coordination. Attend Prudential Committee meetings and Selectboard Meetings,
and report to the Selectboard, Prudential Committees and Town departments. This
candidate could also serve as the Town’s representative to the Champlain Water
District.
This recommendation leaves Fire
Protection as it is.
Pros:
·
Least cost in terms of funds and work.
·
Could be implemented fairly quickly.
·
Could deal effectively with several of the
problems identified above.
·
Does not disrupt the current system.
Cons:
·
Does not address several of the important
problems regarding town planning described above.
·
Relies on recruiting individuals (or an
individual) and receiving accurate and timely information from same. This could be costly, even when
divided.
2)
Work
toward merging of Fire Districts under a single Prudential Committee. Selectboard
encourages and facilitates the legal merger of all three Fire Districts to be
governed by a single Prudential Committee representing the whole of Colchester.
Water supply via Burlington Water District and Complain Water District could
remain the same. Fire Protection could remain voluntary.
This would require voter approval from each
Fire District and/or Legislative action repealing or rewriting the 1961 Act
that organized Colchester’s Fire Districts. With the cooperation of the
Prudential Boards the Town should educate town voters and assist in
disseminating information that might help achieve this goal.
With the establishment of a single Prudential
Committee and Fire District administration, coordination with the Town’s
planning and infrastructure management would be between two entities instead of
four. This solution has been implemented elsewhere but not in a town the size
(population and area) of Colchester.
Pros:
·
Formalizes an already existing relationship.
FD#2 and FD#3 cooperate in a number of important aspects: administrator, and
shared maintenance & installation of infrastructure.
·
Simplifies communication and coordination with
the Town.
·
Is more likely to be understood by Colchester’s
citizens.
·
Broadens the voter base of the Fire District
thereby making the Prudential Committee responsive to the Town in general.
·
Would standardize the by-laws governing water
service and infrastructure.
·
Cost to the Town in time or labor is minimal.
Cons:
·
If voters are not active enough to participate
in Fire District affairs the issue of voter distortion is not solved. The Town’s
interests may be in conflict with the Fire District’s.
·
For some issues, particularly planning and
development issues, this may create what amounts to a second Selectboard.
·
Requires considerable cooperation from the Fire
Districts and their voters. There are a number of legal and financial hurdles
that would have to be surmounted.
·
Success depends on a continuing voter interest
in Prudential Committee affairs.
·
Does not integrate the Town’s interest in sewers
with water provision.
3)
Work
toward merging all Fire Districts under the direction of the Champlain Water
District (CWD). The Selectboard encourages and facilitate the legal merger
of all three Fire Districts under the auspices of the Champlain Water District.
Fire Protection organizations may need to be restructured as separate entities
or entity, or provided by the Town. Several Chittenden County Towns are already
relying on CWD for wholesale and retail water supply. For Colchester to do the
same would serve to regionalize water service.
Pros:
·
Economies of scale may be reflected in the costs
of services.
·
CWD is a large capable organization able to
transition to this structure with minimal disruption.
·
The simplified structure is more understandable
to citizens.
·
Would standardize the by-laws governing water
service and infrastructure.
·
Cost to the Town would be minimal.
Cons:
·
There is but a single elected representative
from Colchester to CWD’s Board, with representatives from many towns. CWD
voluntarily cooperates with the Selectboard and Colchester’s municipal departments.
This could lead to a serious hindrance to environmental and infrastructure
planning.
·
Requires considerable cooperation from the Fire
Districts, their voters and the Champlain Water District. There are a number of
legal and financial hurdles that would have to be surmounted.
4)
Work
toward merging all Fire Districts under the direction of a department within
the Town of Colchester’s administration. The Selectboard encourages and
facilitates the legal merger of all three Fire Districts under the auspices of
the Selectboard and Town administration. Water supply via CWD and the
Burlington Water District could remain the same. This is the structure
implemented by the cities of Vermont most comparable to Colchester in
population size. Fire protection
governance would also have to be considered.
Pros:
·
Planning and maintenance of water and/or sewer
infrastructure would be coordinated within the Town administration and subject
to public and Selectboard review.
·
The current inefficient handling of Sewer
allotment payments could be greatly improved. There could be further integration of water provision with
sewer provision.
·
Citizens see the management of water and sewer
services as a legitimate Town enterprise. Many falsely assume that this is
already the case.
·
Infrastructure environmental and code
requirements would be consistent throughout Colchester and coordinated with the
Town’s planned growth.
·
More of the Town’s existing human and capital
resources would be available for managing and maintaining the Town’s water
and/or waste water system.
Cons:
·
Requires considerable cooperation from the Fire
Districts and their voters. There are a number of legal and financial hurdles
that would have to be surmounted.
·
Is disruptive in the short term, with an impact
on all interested parties.
Further Research
The Governance Committee has not performed an exhaustive
study of the Fire Districts. That is the task of the recommended Blue Ribbon
Committee. The following are suggestions:
·
Direct Fire District involvement – The Fire
Districts have not been formally consulted on the various options considered by
the Committee. Fire District representation on the proposed committee will make this possible. Fire
District officials may well have solutions not yet considered.
·
Town management involvement – Though there have
been informal discussions with town officials there has not been an in-depth
review of possible recommendations. Town officials may well have suggestions
not yet considered.
·
Fire Department and Fire District relationships
– The Committee does not fully understand the relationship (financial and
political) of the Volunteer Fire Departments and the Fire Districts.
·
Implementation details – Some of the options
considered by the Governance Committee will require a number of legal steps:
votes by boards, citizens and State legislators, warnings and public hearings.
There are also financial details about which the Committee is ignorant:
disposition of bonds, employee salaries, benefits and retirement plans, etc.
