By: Cara Latham
ROOSEVELT The cost of replacing the borough’s water tower, recently estimated at $825,000 to $900,000, would be about $1.25 million, Councilwoman Peggy Malkin said this week.
But local leaders said Monday that they need more information before deciding whether to do that or repair the structure, recently rated as poor, at a cost of about $600,000.
And the borough might also look at cleaning and lining its water mains, which could bring the total project cost, including tower replacement, to about $3 million, Councilman Jeff Ellentuck said.
"Of course, we’re weighing repairing the water tower as opposed to replacing the water tower, which would be the more prudent thing to do, the more sensible thing to do," said Ms. Malkin at Monday’s Borough Council meeting.
In the meantime, she said, "the water tank is no way in danger of disintegrating immediately or leaking or falling apart. Everything will be OK until we get all the information we need."
The new estimates came after the council’s Finance Committee met with Borough Engineer Carmela Roberts, Auditor Gerald Stankiewitz and Chief Financial Officer George Lange, to discuss whether to replace or repair the water tower.
Ms. Roberts reported in a February letter to Mayor Beth Battel and the council that a recent inspection of the water tower rated the 85,000-gallon tank, which is about 65 years old, as poor. In addition, she wrote, the borough’s average daily demand is 110,000 gallons, and the borough should have a 200,000-gallon capacity.
In the letter, Ms. Roberts estimated the costs of sandblasting and repainting the water tower at $500,000, while replacement was estimated at about $690,000.
Ms. Roberts also recommended in the letter that the borough clean and line the water mains, at a cost of $550,000 for the 8-inch pipes and $750,000 for the 6-inch pipes.
None of the original estimates, either for the tank or the pipes, included the costs for permitting, administration of grants, and engineering, which she estimated at 20 to 30 percent more.
"Much of the information that she told us were kind of generalities, and a lot of the numbers that she discussed to us were not firm numbers …," said Ms. Malkin at Monday’s meeting.
Repairing the tower would extend its life for about 15 years, while a replacement would last about 70 years, Ms. Malkin told her colleagues.
Councilman Ellentuck said if the water tank were replaced, it would need to be "maintained" every 10 years, and the borough cannot get bond financing beyond 15 to 20 years, if it even gets it in the first place.
And, he added, the cost to replace the water tower could jump another $100,000 to $150,000 if a new water tower is placed within 300 feet of a person’s property because the borough would then have to put up a containment facility.
Mr. Ellentuck said after Monday’s meeting it would be hard for the borough to seek funding for the water tower project and then have to do the same thing for the mains in a couple of years. For that reason, he said, the borough is considering doing both now.
Last week, Councilman Bob Silverstein said officials were hoping to receive a state Department of Environmental Protection loan for the tower and to consolidate an existing loan at a lower interest rate to cover the cost, and that they were planning to hold off on work on the water mains.
But Mr. Ellentuck said Monday it’s possible the borough might not be able to refinance its existing debt or get the financing for the project in the first place.
"One of the things that you have to understand is that the underwriters of the state are going to look to the payment (tax) base to determine whether or not they’re going to get paid" back if they were to issue any financing, he said.
Because of Roosevelt’s tax base where about 640 of the 993 residents are adults the borough might not be able to get bonding for either option, he said.
"We’re exploring a number of options for funding from the county, the feds, whoever to see where we can hopefully catch some money," Mr. Ellentuck said.
Ms. Malkin said that while the Finance Committee needs more information before making a decision, it has to do so in the next couple of months based on Ms. Roberts’ recommendation. Ms. Roberts and Mr. Lange were scheduled to meet with DEP officials next week for more information, she added.
Borough resident Bert Ellentuck, the councilman’s father, said at the meeting he thinks the council should just make the necessary repairs to the water tower and save money.
"We no longer have any large areas of open land which can be developed or high intensity uses, so we’re not going to have any type of increased demand on our water system," he said. "Why should we go ahead and say we’re going to build a much larger water tower? It doesn’t appear to me that there’s any reason for it."
